Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
For the Media: The ABCs of Occupy
It would be comical if it weren’t so pathetic, watching the media desperately trying not to understand what the Occupy movement is all about. So, for the aid of the occupationally obtuse bobble-headed bloviators, I’ll spell it out in Braille:
THE SYSTEM ISN’T WORKING!
The economy is rigged so that all of its fruits go to those at the very top. The political system is repulsively corrupt, odious with the stench of dirty money sluicing through it to buy gutter-dwelling politicians and their votes. And the media itself, for all of its pontifical posturing, does nothing to clarify the situation and empower the people. Nor can it.
It is owned by the very corporations that are the source of the breakdown of the American dream. So, it is no surprise that instead of clarifying and empowering it does exactly the opposite: it occludes and mystifies. It prevents accountability and change, and works to divert, divide and pacify tens of millions of people who have had it and hopefully won’t take it any more.
Here’s the simple, three paragraph executive summary of our current economic situation.
Politicians of both parties (though mainly Republicans) ran up trillions of dollars of debt, selling the American people into lifetimes of debt bondage. To cover their tracks, they inflated a massive housing bubble. But laden with exploding debt and illusory wealth, and triggered by massive criminality in the mortgage banking business, the economy collapsed. It was wrecked by big banks pursuing sociopathically greedy profits. Since they control the government, from the president on down, they got the government to cover their losses with $16 trillion of transfers from the Federal Reserve. They, who wrecked the economy, stuck the rest of us—their victims—with the bill to make them whole. Even a Tea-Partier can understand this part.
Now, $8 trillion of middle class wealth has been destroyed even as 77 million Baby Boomers stand on the threshold of retirement. 7 million jobs have been shipped overseas so corporations can make more and more and more profits. They’re sitting on $2 trillion of past profits but that is still not enough. Another $1 trillion is parked in offshore tax havens so they don’t have to pay American taxes on it. The richest 1% want to dismantle Social Security, Medicare, public pensions, and unions so that they can get their hands on the money and remove the last shred of income security that protects people against destitution. Destitute people are docile people, and that is what they want. Their job is almost done and the only thing standing between dignity and destitution for 300 million Americans is Occupy. Consider how close we already are:
One out of eight Americans are on food stamps. 25 million workers cannot find enough work. 50 million people are living in poverty. One out of three children are raised in poverty. 10 million homes have been lost in foreclosure. Another 20 million are underwater on their mortgage. 47 million people have no access to health care. The share of equity that Americans own in their homes is the lowest it’s been since the Great Depression, even as income inequality is the highest it’s been since before the Depression. There’s just not enough money to educate our children but there’s always enough for endless wars. There’s just not enough for a Depression era-type WPA jobs program, but funny thing, there’s always enough for more tax breaks for the rich.
For those Megalomaniacal Media Morons out there who can’t quite manage to “get it,” this is what Occupy is about. Only the willfully ignorant, criminally complicit, and pathologically naive cannot understand this.
As for solutions, I don’t expect the kids in the city squares to come up with them. I am thankful that they have the courage to simply proclaim what everybody who is sane, sober, and honest already knows: that the Social Contract has been broken; that hard work, playing by the rules, and keeping your nose clean does not lead any more to economic security for ourselves and expanding opportunity for our children. It leads to the slaughterhouse, and that is NOT the deal we signed up for.
Real change will take time, certainly years, maybe decades. It will require a substantial re-arrangement of political and economic power. That is up to the rest of us to carry out, and the political avenue is the only one available to most of us. It will require scrupulous attention that we are not suckered again by phony liberals mouthing cheesy slogans about “hope” and “change,” all the while selling the country and its people down the river. We need a genuinely progressive Congress to act as a reliable counterweight to the irretrievably compromised, cowardly President. And every one of you reading this can help further that end.
We need to get to work so that the clarity of this moment and the courage of this movement are not lost. We need to be vigilant against the massive efforts that will be mounted to divide us, one from another. There will be relentless campaigns to divert our attentions and dissipate our energies. There will be a deluge of demonizing, scads of scapegoating, and boatloads of bogus blame. But through all the media’s professional obfuscation, studied amnesia, and cultivated cluelessness, we must remember the truth and the power in these four simple words:
THE SYSTEM ISN’T WORKING!
It is both our political right and our economic imperative to demand that this be changed. It will probably get more violent before it gets less. I hope we can remain peaceful when it does, for I am chastened by John Kennedy’s comment about third-world uprisings at the height of the Cold War: “When peaceful change becomes impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable.” Let’s hope that we don’t end up there.
On to the fray.
- Posted in
103 Comments so far
Show AllNote: I reread the article and I love ALMOST EVERY WORD OF IT. If he deletes that one phrase, the piece is virtually perfect.
"though mainly Republicans"
This execrable phrase poisons otherwise competent writing.
Remember "The Accused" where the Jodie Foster's character's lawyer goes after the guys who cheered the gang rape?
That is the best spin one can place on Democratic Party members' actions for the past 40 years.
At best, they cheer-or, in Kucinich's and others' case, they soundly condemn the rape while doing nothing to stop it, both hands jammed a bit far into trouser pockets--
At worst, they prevent the prosecution of War Criminals (Pelosi, Holder, Obama) and still, an obviously intelligent person Just Can't See It.
You managed to say it--THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN--yet you "mostly" exclude Democrats?
Democrats will not help us.
The lot of them must go.
If a Democrat wanted my support, s/he could donate 3/4 of their salary to their local Occupy movement, forswear health care that their constituents don't receive, push for a draft that STARTS with sons and daughters of elected officials, then with those who benefit from the repeal of the estate tax, then CEOs, CFOs, other Board Members--
But yeah, the system is broken, mon.
You got that right.
thepuffin
Well said. It is also surprising that Mr. Freeman refrained from pointing out that the Savage Mules are just as eager to engage in military conflicts as their Republican counterparts. This is also the reason why the next stop for the Occupy movement should be that war making organization known as the Pentagon.
And we don't have "decades for change to take place" since the US is not decades, but months away from becoming a third world nation, a condition that nobody alive today will ever see remedied when it occurs.
If Obama were to be suceeded by a real progressive, Obama has drained the US Treasury so there won't be any money to turn things around. FDR was lucky enough to have predecessor (Hoover)who at least left some money in the US Treasury for FDR to work with and turn things around in a matter of months.
____________________________________
Take the money power away from the banks and create debt-free money by the people, and then we have the money to transform our society. Otherwise we have no prayer.
That's right. We're only months, if not weeks, away from a stupendous crash/collapse (as quick and thorough-going as the rapid disappearance of USSR/Warsaw Pact). OWS and their many general assemblies may be the ONLY gov't left, after the fall. Look to your general assemblies.
Also, re-learn Lincoln's Greenbacks policy (J.P. Morgan wanted to gouge him with loans @ 25% interest. Lincoln said F. U. We'll print sovereign credit Greenbacks from the treasury. The people's labor will be its' backing). We don't need wallstreet, their stinking Fed puppet, or their stinking, debt-riddled money. We can carry on with printing violet-colored "OWSlies", in place of the green, federal reserve note dollars.
Puffin, I noticed that, too, as the one statement I might have changed. "Politicians of both parties (though mainly Republicans)" could be changed to say "politicians of both branches of the corporate party".
But if we really look, it actually WAS mostly Republicans and their Golden Calf Ronnie Reagan so technically he is correct. I might suggest a different crime metaphor: the Republicans robbed the bank but the Democrats drove the getaway car.
Either way, this is a wonderful article.
Democrats were complicit in the 1986 tax "reform" that was the most regressive in history (although Obama's upcoming tax reform will be more regressive). Clinton pushed through at least as much regressive legislation as Raygun did.
Right, but that was after campaign finance regulations were rolled back, forcing Democrats to play the game by the fascist rules... or be effectively "fired" by the corporations.
Ray- Yes, indeedy, and wasn't it fun to see the Clinton Clown Car drive up to the White House and disgorge its cast of criminal "advisors", to be taken into the center ring of the Obama circus and freak show?
I still say that if we weighed up the total amount of shit produced by both parties (or both branches of the corporate party, if you will) the scales would tip to the Republicans just a tad bit more.
Part of the reason I say this is that when I talk to the real people that I know who admit to being Republicans, they are all pretty much in agreement about the "I've got mine and fuck the rest of you" philosophy (even if that includes their own grandchildren) whereas many Democrats still hold on to the idea of caring for the most vulnerable among us and leaving something for the future.
Red,
Actually the so called North American Free Trade agreement began with the Canada/US free trade agreement..(!988?)..This was a deal between Canadian conservative party Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and republican President Ronald Reagan...(they just loved each other and remained friends until Reagan's death)
This is how the ball got rolling, eventually expanding to include Mexico...
Thomas Gilbert-
It was largely Clinton's efforts that pushed through the NAFTA treaty. That produced that huge "sucking sound" of good paying jobs going out of the country. NAFTA was the mechanism which has led to the inability of the US to provide manufactured goods for its own needs. It has crippled the US so that it has to purchase these overseas. This has made the US a debtor nation because what we used to make, and pay good wages to our own workers for, we now have to import. Huge mistake and we have to recover from this by rebuilding our manufacturing capacity.
We need to abandon the Old World Politics of Left vs. Right, a distration encouaged, if not fomented, by The Puppet Masters. Quit playing Their game. Out of the rubble of civil war is from what They -- The Bankers -- will build the New Feudal Order. Vote NONE OF THE ABOVE.
You never disappoint in taking aim at voices published on this site.
Once again, I wish to bring to the forum's attention that Visiting Professor contacted me via my personal email, asking for my list of email addresses. His motive was to begin a blog that would use the name "Commondreams" in its title; yet it would be designed to essentially drive readers away from the official CD site to his.
What was interesting was that he asked who I'd recommend for this blog, and when I stated the names of people I found most intelligent, he didn't resonate with their names. (I told him I would have to get their permission before releasing personal email addresses.) The ones he preferred included a few who have personally attacked me. That raised a red flag.
Left/Progressive/Green groups have a history of being infiltrated because individuals with alternative visions are considered "persons of interest" to the old status quo powers. Naturally those who embed themselves in these organizations have to be believable, or how else would they warrant acceptance, and the proximity to "get the goods" on those being observed?
I've pointed out that nary an article is published on CD without one, two, or three character assassins waiting to aim their virtual bullets, doing what they can to decimate the credentials, life-work, or message of the individual being quoted. There are so few voices that lean Left who hold influential media platforms that it would seem far wiser to support those who ARE on the front lines, rather than run purity tests to expose the alleged flaws in their arguments.
Understand, I am not saying that persons published by CD (especially Democratic party faithfuls) are beyond constructive criticism, or that each of us, as a human being, doesn't have more to learn... areas where we could use some personal growth. Yet that is not the same thing that is witnessed, day after day, in these threads. I see a concerted effort, a pattern of responses aimed at discrediting voices who could (and do) make a difference.
Since many of the people CD publishes have media credentials, or teach at universities and otherwise influence people... it makes sense that we lend them our support, rather than look for grounds to knee-cap their efforts. And while Visiting Professor has, of late, tried to paint me as a person with a vendetta against him, that's not it at all. I question his motives for being on this site. While Puffin opened the door by stressing a comment slightly more favorable to Democrats, than Republicans... V.P sandblasted its contents in an attempt to invert all of the important points made by Mr. Freeman. Elainem responded with a far more fair basis for argument.
In any case, if anyone would like a copy of the email VP sent to me, then contact me directly. I am documenting things taking place on Commondreams because I have dealt with an orchestrated smear campaign; and note where the same tactics are being used (on a constant basis) to discredit persons who share much wisdom & experience. They may not be perfect, but they are doing what they can... which is a lot more than can be said of the character assassins positioned to undermine sincere persons, direct from their perch at CD's peanut gallery.
Those insisting upon only promoting safe, middle class, liberal - and mostly white male - voices and excluding more radical voices are enforcing their own "purity test." It is projection when they accuse dissenters of imposing "purity tests."
There are hundreds and hundreds of powerful and insightful writers from the radical left who are completely excluded from consideration by the liberal establishment - from the immigrant rights movement, from dissident radical organized labor, from the African American community, Socialists, Marxists, strong social critics of all stripes. Those voices could and do make a difference, and those voices are victims of the same tactics that are being used on a constant basis to discredit them.
Could it not simply be that many of us on the left disagree with the standard fare we receive here of tepid moderate liberalism? May we not express our disagreement without being accused of nefarious motives or of being infiltrators?
Right on! Well said.
Right on Two Americas AND Struggle! I've been saying since Tricky Dick that crapitalism is the problem. You can't have political democracy without economic democracy!
Can we at least agree that character assassination comes from all sides?! I do get tired of people ranting about who they perceive a commentator to BE rather than just critiquing what they wrote. We will never know exactly what a person's motivations are. Why not focus more on the ideas and solutions than the person who wrote them. If an expression is good -- it's good -- no matter who said it!
Correct - we will never know what is going on internally with a person, and cannot know their motivations or mindset directly. That is why speculating and insinuating about a person's motives or character rather than addressing what they said is counter-productive.
I think the character assassination comes from people who find themselves unable to support their argument, so those who engage in personal attacks and character assassination tend to be those taking the weaker position. Defending various aspects of the status quo - whether expressed in government, partisan political forces, academia, liberal organizations or business - is, in fact, the weaker position.
Ah, yes. Thank you. I made the correction.
"May we not express our disagreement without being accused of nefarious motives or of being infiltrators?"
TA
Civil discussion should be encouraged by all here at cd. I think the far left is well represented on this site. Many are highly respected for their opinions...
The people shown the least respect here are those of more moderate beliefs. And God forbid if one were to suggest a party can be reformed from within. These ideas are just not tolerated here at cd anymore..We had many excellent moderate contributors in the past who no longer post on these cd threads.
I agree with you. Everyone (and I mean everyone) should be able to express their disagreements in a civil manner without being "accused of nefarious motives or of being infiltrators."
Everybody gets to dance
Take Care
Thomas Gilbert-
"... character assassins positioned to undermine sincere persons, direct from their perch at CD's peanut gallery."
Hmmm.
Hear, hear! I was starting to think I was the only one who noticed this! And these "smear" voices all seem to paint OWS as hating the wealthy (68% of whom were actually polled recently as supporting raising taxes on themselves,) as opposed to corporate influence. And they seem to come from a very Orwellian frame of "how it is now is how it has always been" and push either the meme of "its too hard, give up" or "only violent collapse will change things"... both of which, I think, play right into the "shock doctrine" theory: do nothing=slow slide into totalitarian fascism, violent uprising=fast slide into totalitarian fascism.
Which brings it back to the third way: change it from within. This will be hard as hell, and may need a minor miracle to bring about, perhaps a concerted effort of whistleblowers, WikiLeaks, and Anonymous. I believe the Democrats and Republicans are two arms of the Corporate Party...now. But the veneer of civil rights, environmentalism, and social justice does attract true progressives into the Democratic power structure, from mail room volunteers all the way up to elected office, and I think they are much more likely to "do the right thing" over keeping their jobs.
Thank you, Siouxrose! I have seen your comments here on CD I think for as long as I have been reading, nearly six years, and have always found your posts insightful and intelligent, even on the rare occasion I disagree.
"I also caution others against seeking this type of personal information from Siouxrose about me or about any other individual."
If I wanted information about you I would simply ask you. Your caution lacks teeth my friend. Why are you are threatening people? You are very concerned about your email.(Actually it is now Siouxrose's email) Is it really a privacy issue with you? (You surrendered your privacy the moment you pushed the send button)
What I believe is that we have a misunderstanding between two excellent comment contributors here at cd. It is my hope that you both continue to contribute, and over time settle whatever misunderstandings that exist between you.
Thomas Gilbert-
Once again, I wish to bring to the forum's attention that Visiting Professor contacted me via my personal email,"
Siouxrose,
I certainly would be interested in viewing this email....I will contact you...
Perhaps VP would like to respond..
Thomas Gilbert-
The email should be posted out in the open in public (provided that does not violate a promise of confidentiality) or else it should not be discussed at all.
maybe SR would like to share the files she has been keeping on posters here
I personally find that very disturbing.
I agree with your post.
That said, what do personal e-mails have to do with this article? I thought I read Visiting Professor's post, and I don't recall that he attacked Sioux Rose. Did I miss something? In addition, I can't imagine posting any personal e-mails on this site for any reason -- or forwarding any personal e-mails to others unless I have permission from the person who sent the e-mail.
I have to agree with Morticia on this issue -- I find this to be quite disturbing!
Yes, it is very disturbing.
Raising suspicions about another person through insinuation and implications and hints is a way to damage their credibility and so lessen their chance to be heard by others. This is pure poison and seriously cripples the discussion and the group. It asks people to not listen to what the person actually is saying, but rather to speculate about their possible motives or nefarious agenda. Rather than refute the person's argument, the practitioner of this instead seeks to destroy the speaker.
Now I think it necessary for you to respond to Robert Freeman..
I am sure he would interested in what you have to say.
Thomas Gilbert-
I don't think it's appropriate to disclose personal e-mails on CD -- or to offer to share them behind-the-scenes, unless you have the permission of the person who sent you the e-mail. Keeping track of people on CD? What does that mean? Infiltrators? Right-wing provocateurs? When I run across a troll, I avoid them, I don't respond. I have NO time to pursue who and what people are behind their screen names. I am who I am, and therefore, if they want to search me out in the light of day, they'll probably find me at home, writing, or at OWS. If they know what I look like, they'll be walking a lot -- since I get around the city by walking -- I don't have the money for public transportation. That should wear them out very quickly! I really have nothing they can take from me.
Second, Visiting Professor's intention was to form a "google" group in order to find a way to organize, since organizing on CD isn't possible. Although you didn't give VP my e-mail, someone else did -- with my permission.
You and I have had personal correspondence in the past -- just between the two of us -- mostly about various issues that face women and girls in our society and around the world. However, I suppose that we have discussed issues that might not be complimentary to me if you chose to forward the correspondence to others. All of us have our days and our weaknesses. And, I have a lot of days, and a lot of weaknesses to which I will fully admit. I would hope that you don't pass my correspondence around to others. If you do, though, there's nothing I can do about it.
In this case, I didn't read in VP's post any attacks on you. Therefore, I don't understand your need to be defensive. And, offering his personal correspondence to other writers/readers on CD is, IMO, beyond the pale and quite disturbing.
This is Robert Freeman, the author of the piece.
Visiting Professor is an infiltrator, trying to disrupt the spread and effectiveness of progressive ideas. To do that, he needs to de-legitimize effective spokespeople. His weapon is character assassination and if we let him succeed it will inure to the damage of our cause.
Let’s look at what he says:
“He is a Democratic Party shill, nothing more.”
That’s amazing, given that I couldn’t have been more scathing in my condemnation of the Democrats. Quoting from the piece above:
“It will require scrupulous attention that we are not suckered again by phony liberals mouthing cheesy slogans about “hope” and “change,” all the while selling the country and its people down the river. We need a genuinely progressive Congress to act as a reliable counterweight to the irretrievably compromised, cowardly President.”
Does that sound like a “Democratic Party shill”?
Or, feel free to read his piece in which I excoriated Obama for his duplicity and shameless whoring that led to the Republican takeover of the House in 2010:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/11/07
Or, feel free to read this piece in which I condemned Democrats in the harshest terms for their for their faux-liberalism:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0329-22.htm
These could not possibly be more scathing, and put to the lie VP’s fundamental premise.
VP, if you’re so smart and out there at the ramparts, feel free to put up your own work to establish your bona fides. I suspect you have none, do you?
Souix Rose, thank you for the yeoman’s job you are doing unmasking VP and his ilk. It is extremely valuable and part of the requisite vigilance I referred to when I wrote above,
“We need to be vigilant against the massive efforts that will be mounted to divide us, one from another. There will be relentless campaigns to divert our attentions and dissipate our energies. There will be a deluge of demonizing, scads of scapegoating, and boatloads of bogus blame.”
It was precisely to the scum like VP that this passage was directed. And we should have no illusions: he will slink away but will slither back in another alias, and another, and another. As Barry Goldwater once said, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
As one of the "ilk" - I object.
The smear campaign is being waged against the critics of liberalism here, not by them.
I thought your article was for the most part good, but I do disagree with a few of your premises and stated that disagreement. That is not cause for my motives or character to be called into suspicion, even through guilt by association.
You are making a broad brush condemnation against any and all critics of mainstream liberalism, and using the most provocative and inflammatory rhetoric to do that.
Address the legitimate disagreements people have with what you wrote rather than joining in on the suspicion and insinuation mongering campaign against critics and dissidents here.
I objected to you calling the OWS protestors "kids" and to calling for the restoration of some "American Dream," and to your "mostly Republican" statement. Those are legitimate objections to your article, and I am more than willing to defend my positions on those.
Had I arrived earlier in the day, I, too, would have been charged as one of the "ilk!"
After reading the article twice, I agree with your final paragraph -- and I would add the phrase "executive summary" to your list.
Mr. Freeman, you are a brave man to step into the fray here. The articles you gave links to are also excellent and perhaps ahead of their time. Interesting how you were writing this right about the time I was referencing Clinton's Clown Car of advisors, (in a response to radelcamino, above) now members of Obama's circus, since you mentioned this in your November 7, 2010 article. To me, seeing those fools (Summers, Geitner, and their guru Rubin) was really the clincher when I looked for evidence of whom Obama is really working for. You just keep up the good work of calling it like you see it.
Robert,
You response to VP leaves much to be desired. Perhaps you might like to try it again?
It is not often we have a featured writer answering his/her critics here at cd, .(One other writer that I recall) when this occurs I would expect the featured writer to respond within the realm of a higher standard than that which you demonstrated in your response to VP.
Please..No more Barry Goldwater Quotes..
Thomas Gilbert_
Is this response genuine? Does the author expect us to respect his opinion when he responds like this? It can't be real, could it?
Someone trying to tell us what Occupy is about and demanding someone "establish" his "bona fides"? I don't think so.
Sherry -- you beat me to the the question that circled in my head, "Is this response genuine?" ETC.!
I hardly know what to say -- and that's unusual for me!
"It was precisely to the scum like VP that this passage was directed. And we should have no illusions: he will slink away but will slither back in another alias, and another, and another. As Barry Goldwater once said, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” -- robertf
I believe that Ida B. Wells wrote, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty" -- in her 1970 autobiography, Crusade for Justice. Correct me if I'm wrong -- please!
"Scum" is a rather tacky word to use to establish your own bona fides, isn't it?
Great work, excellent report.
As is so often the case, writers featured at CD are not merely offering different "opinions" than the ones we hold, rather they are concocting an alternative reality, making up stories about what is happening rather than reporting and commenting upon what is actually happening. The author's assertions are easily, utterly and undeniably refuted by the simple act of actually going out and observing objective reality - asking people what they think, for example, rather than making up "opinions" about what people think.
Making up alternative realities that just happen to support a particular political agenda that advances the agenda of those in power - that is lying, it is not expressing an "opinion."
Those three themes - that change takes a long time and must happen incrementally; that the goal should be to elect "better" people to government; that the ultimate goal of any and all efforts we make is to restore the "American Dream" - are hammered on and hammered on by those in positions of power and influence within the liberal and progressive communities. Clearly - clearly! - those mean slow down and lower your expectations; don't rock the boat; and don't question the underlying set of lies used to justify the existing system and the conditions it inevitably produces.
My experiences at OWS mirror VP's experience at OCCUPY SAN FRANCISCO!
Thanks for the report, VP!
And, thanks for your post, Two Americas!
Your comment about "not rocking the boat" reminded me of Nina Simone, and her 1963 composition, MISSISSIPPI GODDAM -- the civil rights movement often heard this strategy from TPTB, and they also heard the message "go slow!" If they had listened, they never would have gotten, at that time, what they deserved and needed. Of course, we have all witnessed the backlash and we know we're all sliding backwards into the abyss. Today's message is the same -- remember to "go slow!"
Nina Simone knew the score and said it best!
The name of this tune is Mississippi Goddam
And I mean every word of it
Alabama's gotten me so upset
Tennessee made me lose my rest
And everybody knows about Mississippi Goddam
Alabama's gotten me so upset
Tennessee made me lose my rest
And everybody knows about Mississippi Goddam
Can't you see it
Can't you feel it
It's all in the air
I can't stand the pressure much longer
Somebody say a prayer
Alabama's gotten me so upset
Tennessee made me lose my rest
And everybody knows about Mississippi Goddam
This is a show tune
But the show hasn't been written for it, yet
Hound dogs on my trail
School children sitting in jail
Black cat cross my path
I think every day's gonna be my last
Lord have mercy on this land of mine
We all gonna get it in due time
I don't belong here
I don't belong there
I've even stopped believing in prayer
Don't tell me
I tell you
Me and my people just about due
I've been there so I know
They keep on saying "Go slow!"
But that's just the trouble
"do it slow"
Washing the windows
"do it slow"
Picking the cotton
"do it slow"
You're just plain rotten
"do it slow"
You're too damn lazy
"do it slow"
The thinking's crazy
Where am I going
What am I doing
I don't know
I don't know
Just try to do your very best
Stand up be counted with all the rest
For everybody knows about Mississippi Goddam
I bet you thought I was kiddin' didn't ye?
Picket lines
School boycotts
They try to say it's a communist plot
All I want is equality
for my sister my brother my people and me
Yes you lied to me all these years
You told me to wash and clean my ears
And talk real fine just like a lady
And you'd stop calling me Sister Sadie
Oh but this whole country is full of lies
You're all gonna die and die like flies
I don't trust you any more
You keep on saying "Go slow!"
"Go slow!"
But that's just the trouble
"do it slow"
Desegregation
"do it slow"
Mass participation
"do it slow"
Reunification
"do it slow"
Do things gradually
"do it slow"
But bring more tragedy
"do it slow"
Why don't you see it
Why don't you feel it
I don't know
I don't know
You don't have to live next to me
Just give me my equality
Everybody knows about Mississippi
Everybody knows about Alabama
Everybody knows about Mississippi Goddam
That's it for now! see ya' later
Nina Simone wrote the words and the lyrics in 1963, and she recorded the song.
You can probably find the recording on iTunes -- or, if you want a CD, you'll find the recording on The Best of Nina Simone, which includes other classic recordings by Nina, including "The Other Woman," "I Put a Spell on You," "Four Women" and "Pirate Jenny," among others. The CD is well worth the investment!
Mr. Freeman, this is not a particularly high minded response. You are doing exactly what you are saying that you are warning against - you are arousing suspicion amongst posters here and encouraging mistrust.
I have said it many times before. I don't think CD is all that important to the 'powers that be'. Many will say i am wrong. So be it. I find it fairly mainstream liberal as far as what it publishes. And they supported a Democratic president in 2008, which i will never understand. Why would a website support any candidate? Also,
You refer to Obama as a "coward". That implies he had a different agenda when elected, but somehow chickened out. Or am i incorrect? I am open to being criticized if warranted. I find that hard core Obama supporters can't seem to admit to themselves that they were bamboozled in the first place. Perhaps you are one of them? I don't know. I could look it up and see what you were writing during the last presidential campaign.
In summation, let me just say that i find the tone of your response rather shocking.
Not to mention quoting Barry Goldwater. It is my understanding that he thought that the u.s. should drop nukes on Vietnam. Perhaps i am incorrect here as well.
You're right on the money Robert Freeman. Anybody who watches the mainstream media without a cynical approach can be deemed as someone who "doesn't get it". Progressives must sever their ties with the Democratic Party. The general citizenry must reject corporatism at every turn. The concept of joining the military must be stigmitized by drawing connections to the army's primary function... to do the bidding of its corporate overlords. The same can be said of the many variations of domestic "law enforcement". It's going to be a long slog, but it's worth the effort.
"Those who don't read newspapers are uninformed, while those who read newspapers are misinformed"
Mark Twain (and he wrote for newspapers)
Ray,
Thank you for reminding of that quote...Precious
Thomas Gilbert-
Gandhi said something like, first they ignore you, then they vilify you, then they hit you, then you win. The question is when?
Hoa binh
The system is not merely broken. With the banker criminals and the war profiteers getting away with all their heinous crimes along with their enablers in government, there is no longer any rule of law. Without the rule of law, the corporate state no longer has any legitimacy. It is a fraud.
It's a police state - and we know who owns the cops.
Protest against wall street - bust it up.
Protest against wars - bust it up.
Protest with teabaggers - hey, bring your gun.
Steve: Exactly. Chris Hedges defined the US as a post-law nation. The recent slew of assassination orders places the rogue nation's naked lawlessness out in the open. That's in case citizens of foreign lands not beholden to our nation's propagandized media retain any romantic notions about Amerika serving as "peace keeping" force to the world, while its elites continue to engineer a parade of wars of aggression, each on the basis of blatantly premeditated "evidence." Aggressive war constitutes THE Supreme Crime according to the Geneva Conventions. The problem is, when the world's bully controls so much in the way of capital AND military hardware, an equally empowered force is necessary to deprive it of its dark power.
I've shared this before: George Lucas' "Star Wars" serves as the myth for our times. Note that it was an eclectic, peaceful coalition that managed to find the singular flaw in Vader's Death Star, and disable the terrorist machinery. OWS, and its branches round the world may well signify that eclectic formation! Let us hope so... inasmuch as life oftentimes comes to mirror art.