Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- This Is What Happens When You Rip a Hole in the Safety Net
- New Sanders Bill Would Break Up Big Banks
- The Day That TV News Died
- So Your Groundwater's Poison and Your Tap Water's On Fire. Not to Worry: Fracking Chemicals Are Trade Secrets You Don't Need To Know About
- The '147 People' Destroying the US Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
As Santorum and Romney Battle for the Loony Right, the Rest of Us Should Not Gloat
My father was a Republican for the first 78 years of his life. For the last twenty, he’s been a Democrat (he just celebrated his 98th.) What happened? “They lost me,” he says.
They’re losing even more Americans now, as the four remaining GOP candidates seek to out-do one another in their race for the votes of the loony right that’s taken over the Grand Old Party.
(Photo: REUTERS/Joshua Lott)
But the rest of us have reason to worry.
A party of birthers, creationists, theocrats, climate-change deniers, nativists, gay-bashers, anti-abortionists, media paranoids, anti-intellectuals, and out-of-touch country clubbers cannot govern America.
Yet even if they lose the presidency on Election Day they’re still likely to be in charge of at least one house of Congress as well as several state legislators and governorships. That’s a problem for the nation.
The GOP’s drift toward loopyness started in 1993 when Bill Clinton became the first Democrat in the White House in a dozen years – and promptly allowed gays in the military, pushed through the Brady handgun act, had the audacity to staff his administration with strong women and African-Americans, and gave Hillary the task of crafting a national health bill. Bill and Hillary were secular boomers with Ivy League credentials who thought government had a positive role to play in peoples’ lives.
This was enough to stir right-wing evangelicals in the South, social conservatives in the Midwest and on the Great Plains, and stop-at-nothing extremists in Washington and the media who hounded Bill Clinton for eight years, then stole the 2000 election from Al Gore, and Swift-boated John Kerry in 2004.
They were not pleased to have a Democrat back in the White House in 2008, let alone a black one. They rose up in the 2010 election cycle as “tea partiers” and have by now pushed the GOP further right than it has been in more than eighty years. Even formerly sensible senators like Olympia Snowe, Orrin Hatch, and Dick Lugar are moving to the extreme right in order to keep their seats.
At this rate the GOP will end up on the dust heap of history. Young Americans are more tolerant, cosmopolitan, better educated, and more socially liberal than their parents. And relative to the typical middle-aged America, they are also more Hispanic and more shades of brown. Today’s Republican Party is as relevant to what America is becoming as an ice pick in New Orleans.
In the meantime, though, we are in trouble. America is a winner-take-all election system in which a party needs only 51 percent (or, in a three-way race, a plurality) in order to gain control.
In parliamentary systems of government, small groups representing loony fringes can be absorbed relatively harmlessly into adult governing coalitions.
But here, as we’re seeing, a loony fringe can take over an entire party — and that party will inevitably take over some part of our federal, state, and local governments.
As such, the loony right is a clear and present danger.
Robert Reich, one of the nation’s leading experts on work and the economy, is Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. Time Magazine has named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including his latest best-seller, Aftershock: The Next Economy and America’s Future; The Work of Nations; Locked in the Cabinet; Supercapitalism; and his newest, Beyond Outrage. His syndicated columns, television appearances, and public radio commentaries reach millions of people each week. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine, and Chairman of the citizen’s group Common Cause. His widely-read blog can be found at www.robertreich.org.
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...
276 Comments so far
Show AllIt has been said before but must be said again. A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.
"As such, the loony right is a clear and present danger." RReich
You bet they are. They control the white house and congress, all statehouses and, most horrifically to me, even the cognitive processes of supposedly intelligent academics such as Mr. Reich.
Yes, there are none so blind as those who prefer not to see (thanks to OS) in order to maintain their advantaged status.
Note to RR: If you wait much longer to make the leap, you will be trampled by those running past you.
Who's gloating? The farce is horrifying--- but not at all for the reasons Prof. Reich posits.
This is what happens when the DNC, DLC, DSCC, etc. have been captured by Wall Street and AIPAC. The Democratic Party is now more right wing than Richard Nixon. It is unreservedly committed to empire, wars, occupations, bailouts, and all manner of neo-feudal corporate welfare. And the GOP, hopelessly twisted by it's own dissonant Rovian propaganda, has nowhere to turn but the outer lunatic fringe.
Thus, by design, the cartoonish spectacle of the three stooges, Mitt, Rick, and Newt, is the perfect foil for Wall Street's golden Trojan horse. In the duopoly theater we still like to call democracy, Prof Reich is playing his part once again, and the stage is now set for Neocon Obama to be crowned with laurel on Mt Olympus to cheering crowds. Only the capricious gods can intervene now.
Doug: Exceptionally incisive post. Thank you.
Doug:
The groups you name are not so much "captured' as created to do what they are doing. Thanks for listing them in a single, clear posting. People can run them down and look up their origins.
You conveniently left out the only candidate dedicated to peace, ending the drug war, ending the bailouts, ending corporate person hood (look it up), and ending the private bank controlled Federal Reserve, Ron Paul.
OMG. You are promoting Ron Paul. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. And here I thought we were debating Socialism versus Anarchism. You had me fooled, but I blame myself for falling for it.
I will let blogger Devin Wallace address this:
Ron Paul, get out of Occupy movement
The Occupy movement spread to 951 cities across the globe, has inspired people to take to the streets in the face of police brutality, and continues to be a driving force in the elevating consciousness of the American people. While the viewpoints of protesters are varied, from tepid moderates to hardened anarchists, there is one element that cannot be allowed to sway the movement: the Cult of Ron Paul.
As I’ve said before, the Occupy movement needs to be an anti-capitalist movement. Only then can the Earth be saved from the rampant destruction caused by profit-hungry businesses. Only then can the working class overcome a life of hardship caused by corporate-induced scarcity. Yet the “Ron Paul camp,” which I’ll describe herein as libertarians, refuses to see this.
The problem is “crony capitalism,” they say. “Don’t blame the free market.” They’re horribly wrong. Crony capitalism is an excuse to shift the problem of capitalism to a collusion of business and government. While it’s a fact that businesses have taken over government, that’s the natural path of capitalism, however much libertarians want to deny it. Capitalism centers wealth, therefore power, in the hands of a few. Businesses consolidate and try and control more of the market. Eventually we have the 1% we see today, abusing the 99%. They have the money to take over the government, which businesses have done. It isn’t some deformed version of capitalism; it’s the natural path of profit-driven accumulation.
If the Occupy movement wants to be a sustainable protest against inequality, it needs to make sure the focus is on the inherent problems of capitalism and the incentive capitalism provides for greed. Ron Paul and his misguided libertarian followers, many of whom have good ideas, need to realize capitalism is the problem, not their created specter of crony capitalism. If they don’t, the Occupy movement needs to make sure the focus is clear: an end to capitalism.
http://blog.timesunion.com/highschool/ron-paul-get-out-of-occupy-movement/24169/
Hmmmm.
I quoted a writer who happens to be in high school, and according to you that "says something about the maturity level, and lack of experience with the world" that I have? ROFL.
I intentionally picked that writer, among many I could have cited about Ron Paul and Occupy. I wanted to see if you would slam them because of their age. Sure enough, you did.
I have no doubt that there are Paul supporters in Occupy. No dispute there. The point is that your views are not representative of the views of everyone in Occupy, or even of most.
I am an anarchist first and a Paul supporter out of desperation to stop murderous wars, don't project your fundamentalist Communism on me and assume I am fundamentalist Paul supporter, if Cynthia McKinney were electable or David Graeber the anarchist were organizing a general strike to bring down state capitalism I'd abandon Paul in a heartbeat! Just because Commies do infiltrate groups to undermine them don't ASSUME I am doing the same for Paul, I'd like nothing better than to throw Paul under the bus if their were a more humane REAL alternative coming to power, or destroying the powers that be for that matter.
Sorry that I am eclectic and pragmatic and not a true believer idealist like you, but you are just going to have to deal Mike!
What is a "fundamentalist" Ron Paul supporter?
If you are going to promote Ron Paul, but then say that you are doing it for different reasons than those other Paul supporters, and claim that you are doing so out of desperation, then you are using exactly the same line of reasoning as the "lesser of two evils" Obama supporters.
I think you get this year's Joseph McCarthy Memorial Red-Baiting Award. Hell, the lifetime achievement award.
I really, really, really would not go down the path of trying to use real life information against me. Play with fire, you're gonna get burned, my friend.
Are you threatening me Commie? If so I ought not be surprised Commies are always the first to leap to the use of coercive violence against those they perceive as enemies. I am not scared of you, and can defend myself with full force of arms, so buzz off and go to a "cell meeting," mmmK?
You are doing a lot of projecting.
You are the one making threats.
You are the one talking about using guns.
Tell me you didn't post "mmmK."
Just ignore him...let him talk to himself..
What do you expect when you make none too subtly veiled threats like:
"Play with fire, you're gonna get burned, my friend."
Do you expect me to say please come hurt me? No thanks...
You know damned what I am talking about. You have been alluding to things you think you know about my personal life, through mutual acquaintances in real life, including family.
You made the "subtly veiled threats," and you know that is true. I am saying that if you persist in trying to embarrass me or discredit me through some sort of slander about my personal life, or what you imagine about my personal life, that it could reflect poorly on you.
The only threat to you is that you could be embarrassed or discredited, just as you are trying to do to me.
No one is trying to hurt you. You are the one talking about guns and violence. You are the one making threats. You are the one making the personal attacks.
Incorrect I never initiated any threat against anyone, my point was IF someone attacks me with violent force, that I reserve the right to reserve with violent force in kind. YOU were the one who INITIALLY said something vaguely threatening but with plausible deniability about "playing with fire," or some such.
I am glad that you don't want to try to hurt me, that wouldn't be wise. :)
I wholeheartedly agree that Capitalism is evil and is destroying our planet. In that regard Dr. Paul is wrong in his views. However, he is the only one calling for the tentacles of empire to draw back into its metaphorical Pandora’s Box. And most importantly, he wants to STOP the killing! Shouldn’t that be the most important quality or platform for any candidate, regardless of their party affiliation? More than anything, I think that’s what attracts progressive-minded voters to Paul. Stopping war, occupation and killing should be the first moral priority.
Privatization can not possibly rein in the empire. It unleashes it.
Paul is the ultimate promoter of privatization.
Paul does not want to stop the killing, He wants to privatize it.
Not quite correct, he wants to end the imperial nation state based around Washington D.C., which would end the wars of aggression to serve crony connected corporate enterprises and Israel.
Where I would agree with you is that under his Austrian school unregulated capitalism there would be tremendous exploitation of laboring people, and destruction of the environment. Thus I would only like to see someone like Dr. Paul at the national level to destroy the Federal government, at the local level I would like to see Greens, left anarchists and other anti authoritarian lefties rebuild a more humane democratic society based around co-ops, community buildings like meeting halls, libraries, etc, and some local very small businesses as long as they didn't employ wage slaves selling on a local market. Really my view is closest to Murray Bookchin's, though with a slightly more market cooperative orientation.
IMO the end of the American empire is very near and unless we find ways to build bridges with Libertarians who share some our values we are not going to be able to rebuild in the aftermath of the end of empire, peak oil., and financier class malfeasance, etc. From what I can see the permaculture, Occupy, and transition town people, (and some Greens and Libertarians) get this need for people from a wide range of ideologies to work together, even if fundamentalist doctrinaire commies, don't, smirk. So please *watch* and learn if you attend meetings of any of those groups TA rather than attempting to co-opt them over into a rigid inflexible state centralist Communist ideology as stealth Commies are notorious for doing to the Greens for example.
Does it not strike you as ironic that you talk of "building bridges," yet although you freely welcome libertarians into your circle and other right wingers, and are promoting Ron Paul, you viciously attack those whom you have decided are "murdering Bolsheviks?"
Does it not strike you as ironic that while you accuse leftists who dare to disagree with you about anything of "attempting to co-opt people over into a rigid inflexible state centralist Communist ideology" - with absolutely no evidence to support that charge - you are here are attempting to co-opt people into extreme right wing Red Scare hysteria, and into supporting Ron Paul?
I wonder if we could also get you to explain your views on sexism, the international banking conspiracy, and Israel.
I want to build bridges to those who are against coercion and statism, and for local self rule, so NO that wouldn't be Bolshevik Commies. I have no beef with anti authoritarian lefties being one, I despise authoritarians like Commies of all stripes.
You can fuck off with your interrogation Commie, I do have a reading assignment for you though, Anarchism After Leftism, by Bob Black, and no it's NOT Libertarian, or An-cap or Austrian, it is however a good diagnoses of what toxic statist Marxist memes are doing to distort the pursuit of true freedom from coercion:
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Bob_Black__Anarchy_after_Leftism.html
If you must know BTW, I despise, identity politics and consider it unworthy of politics which ought to be about issues effecting all people, and despise Israel's cruel oppression of the Palestinian people, I also despise banks but see no conspiracy, they do their state assisted leverage fraud out in the open. Make sure to put all that in your file on me as an incorrect non fundamentalist Bolsehevik, OK?
Can this country withstand four to five more years of President Obama or any of the GOP candidates? Can we as a nation survive four to five more years of endless wars, lack of accountability for the financial sector and any large corporate entities, destruction of previous held civil liberties, privatization of our public assets and further deregulation? We are continually eroding as a nation thanks in part to the political elite who are clueless about what a Republic is and who it represents. When will the people in this country rise up to demand a government which represents the citizens first? When will the people say we are turning off the main stream media and their jaundiced and propagandized views of the "news"?
For all of you who may not be willing or able to join an Occupy movement, how about using your vote to reflect what you truly believe. If you don't believe in the policies I listed above, then don't vote for the President and the same members of Congress who are taking us down this path.
Question: what if there was a rebellion by the citizens (not the party heads) of both or one of the political parties and the electors nominated "None of the Above" for President?
Wow.
Poster after poster here gets it.
So why can't Reich? Or any other pundit, other than Greenwald, Taibbi, and a few other rare exceptions?
$
"In parliamentary systems of government, small groups representing loony fringes can be absorbed relatively harmlessly into adult governing coalitions."
Not true - loony fringes can act as "kingmakers", and exact a very high price from other parties trying to put together a coalition. Just look at the set-up in Israel.
Or Canada.
Reichsfurher Harper's Corporate Occupation Party started out as the extreme right conservative fringe 'Reform Party' under Preston Manning, eventually gained enough muscle via making right-wing Corporate demands to co-opt large sections of the Progressive Conservative Party, becoming the 'Conservative/Reform Alliance Party' (Yes, they really did call it that. Until someone pointed out what the acronym spelled...), which morphed into the 'Alliance Party', which did it's own bizzaro land transformation into the 'Conservative Party of Canada', and won the most recent Federal Election. The results of which are now is in doubt due to political dirty tricks: US style 'robocalling', threatening and intimidating phonecalls to opposition party members and supporters, and deliberate misdirection of voters to non-existent polling stations, all of which are adding up to election tampering by the Harper Corporate Occupation Party.
The 'loony fringe' can not only ACT as king makers, they can become kings themselves. Keep a VERY sharp eye on Santorum.
If 30 million Canadians tried their best, and worked very hard, they could reverse the clock and return Canada to its prior status as: a Police State.
Dual Citizen
I'm a dual citizen too, and I say your comment is just dumbass nonsense.
It is the harper Government that is turning back the clock, making Canada a hewer of wood and drawer of oil to service the US and China, while decimating its manufacturing sector.
It is the Harper Government that has tried to return Canada to it outdated status as a loyal subject of the Empire, this time based not in London, but in Washington. "Ready, Aye, Ready!" -- the old promise made by Laurier to fight alongside the British no matter what, is repeated now by Harper.
And, laughably, it is the Harper Government that brought back the "Royal Canadian Navy" moniker for Canada's naval forces.
Turn back the clock? Harper is "Ready, Aye, Ready!" to wind it so far back 1867 will seem like it happened just yesterday.
Wind the clock back past the sad death in Calgary of Police Constable Sonnenberg - - - and Harper disappears. I was living there when this death occurred and the 17 year old Yazlovasky youth was tried in adult court, and charged with first degree murder. My private efforts got the charge reduced to vehicular manslaughter - not bad for a psychologist, eh?
I am no supporter of Harper; I'm his worst nightmare.
Trylon
excellent point secretarybird. In Israel, tiny fanatical, ultra-orthodox "settler" political parties exert control over the more "mainstream" Likud/Kadima rightwing. They can do this because the Israeli Labor Party is big enough to challenge Likdu/Kadima, who therefore cannot govern except in coalition with the "settlers". Thus flaming racist nutjob Avigor Lieberman, leader of some little rightwing fraction party with a constituency no bigger than about 150,000 at most, is Israeli Defense Minister in Kadima leader Netanyahu's coalition govt. And thus the "settler" tail wags the dog (and wags the entire US MIC indirectly). This may all be an elaborate kabuki with lots of nudging and winking among the participants, but at the same time, it is a necessary condition of the present political status quo.
The American Right isn't quite this slick, but in a parliamentary system they could have pulled this off. meanwhile, even when the Right loses, it wins, by legitimizing insanely reactionary ideas and pushing the debate rightward.. It is all made easy for them by a spineless, indolent and practically unresponsive Democratic Party which no longer even feels the whip on its back. Any party that sends a flannel-mouthed hack like Harry Reid or that goggle-eyed spoiled rich girl Nancy Pelosi against two-fisted gutter fighters like Mitch McConnell or John Boehner is brain-dead.
Avigor Lieberman is foreign minister... not defence minister.
Foreign minister of Israel and "defence" minister of the US!
"loony fringes can act as "kingmakers", and exact a very high price from other parties trying to put together a coalition"
Secretary,
Excellent point.
Thomas Gilbert-
WE 're in far more danger from the CORPORATIST center of both so called wings of the MONEY party then we are from the loopy fundies and their fellow travelers.
Compare and contrast this article with a balanced assessment, which recognizes the dangers of the insane Republican field, while giving Obama and the Dem leadership the roasting they deserve:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brenner/santorum-romney-democrats_b_1306303.html
Reich appears here almost daily. He is a neoclassical/neoliberal economist who adheres to the same failed economic theories that got us into this mess.
He failed to see the crisis coming and he is failing to see the next one coming.
Since CD refuses to post these great scholars and insist on flooding us with this garbage here is the link to Prof. Michael Hudson site.
http://michael-hudson.com/
Prof Steve Keen is another
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/
I have requested that these economist appear here, however they are not propaganda pushing neoclassical apologists for the corrupt D party, alas therefore we shall not see them here
Socialist: Thank you for the links. I agree with your post 100%.
Galen: Excellent depiction of what went wrong with Canada. There is an astrological explanation if anyone would like me to share it in greater depth. Briefly, what's clear is that most nations connected to the U.S. have inception dates that make them cardinal signs (Aries, Cancer, Libra & Capricorn); and it is precisely these signs that are receiving tension from the 3 karmic heavy-weight planets, Saturn, Uranus and Pluto. (All 3 were similarly active during the early l930's, when economic implosions also took place... the thrust of which led to the momentum that fueled fascist policies.)
The pendulum that swings from Left to Right (as elites use all the resources they can conjure by any means possible to hold it there) operates in accord with the larger cycles built into the framework of time, itself.
As I've been repeating, 2012-2014 represents the peak time of tensions... ones strong enough to tear nations apart, or tear them down altogether. The US & Canada share close "birth" dates which explains the synchronous trends. The year 2020 looks VERY promising for something in the order of a Global Constitution where laws respectful of human rights, The Commons, and natural resources will come into play as a universal governing source.
Anyone IN the hot seat when the karmic shit comes down will not be in an enviable position...
I think you should startup a new Name/Login...Siouxrose and Siouxrose2 Astro Girl. Sometimes your posts are excellent, well reasoned, very insightful, etc. And sometimes, when you go into Siouxrose2 Astro Girl mode you appear to come off the rails with this astrology mumbo jumbo. I have to say, it really detracts from the credence of your other posts. And believe me, I'm very pro-science, but I also allow plenty of room for alternate, not yet discovered, ways to explain the world around us. It's just that astrology, no matter how you try to couch it in faux systematic language, ain't it by a long shot.
Astrology is bunk, pure and simple. If the Left gives up on reason, it is lost.
LeeZ is the new troll "face" of the 2012 election cycle ...... to sidebar from the Issues at hand ...... ie, Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness .... to turn Truth on its head ..... to obfuscate Freedom ..... to attack effective, articulate, loving people like Siouxrose .... Troll weeding will be big this year ......
"Troll weeding" ie blatant censorship of dissent? You are going to love it here! Big O-bot fan too Bob?
You, on the other had, are promoting Ron Paul.
You just can't make this stuff up.
Ron Paul wants to roll back the number of laws on the books, and end the FBI and CIA, ie he is ANTI police state. Maybe you didn't get the message at Commie central?
I understand.
Believe me, your message is coming through loud and clear now.
To the contrary, because I am up-to-date on issues and can reason quite deeply, I would expect those who have bought into the prejudices leveraged against my field (by the Karl Roves of former times) to revisit their resistance, and consider the wisdom drawn from The Logos: "As above, so below."
You, and anyone else, are certainly free to bypass any mention of astrology. Surely a TRUE Progressive would not be offended by the ultimate OUT of the BOX thinking? Our culture gives air-time to religious whackos, endless sports arenas, liars posing as news reporters, endless shopping channels, and mostly lousy drama... the ONE thing conspicuous by its absence is any serious discussion of the esoteric. And contrary to your limited worldview, there is MUCH scholarship on this subject most of it published from the late l860's until the l980's.
Do you know that the Vatican retains an occult library? Have you ever wondered why the age-old questions:
Why am I here?
What does life mean?
Does it all end with Death?
Is there some plan to the human experience?
Never go out of style? And while science is fairly good at answering the mechanical questions, and explaining HOW things work, it does not have answers for the loftier questions.
Patriarchal religions, along with the Bible (which has become the foundation for modern law in the West) have never tolerated ANY voices that challenge their notions of a father god.
Because the astrologer sets forth a series of very compelling premises that expand upon the nature of Creator (and, of course, Creation) it remains a threat to those authoritarians who require a religious basis for the retention of a cruel hierarchical order.
I am very suspicious of those who demand that I stop speaking on this subject... since other venues have been closed off to me over the course of the past 17 years. That means I will use whatever venues remain open to get (what I take for) The Higher Truth out there.
In Tony Norman's article today, he explains how the authoritarians first recoiled when women got the vote in this nation. Established power does not easily entertain ANY challenges to the order it wishes to impose. The understanding of karma, along with the notion that the 12 signs each represent a Divine Power or attribute of Creator, are HUGE threats to the teachings of the old church.
I can (and do) write books on this subject. Asking me to not speak about the subjects I am most versed in is not much different from males imposing other behavioral standards, those representative of THEIR interests, onto women.
It is precisely a sensibility like mine that was purged during the Middle Ages where women possessed of intuition were literally murdered for their knowledge. On behalf of that brutally-silenced Voice, I will state what I have found to be true. And how DARE you ask to silence me now?
There is a MASSIVE debt here. And it's never seen redress. You may well have been among the crowds cheering on the burning of Women of Wisdom. Then, as now, you own no right to silence others.
.
Bravo!
Note: this post by Leezasky -
"Astrology is bunk, pure and simple. If the Left gives up on reason, it is lost"
- will follow a few posts I would like to share. I chose this particular place to add my thoughts, because the discussion connected with SR seems to illustrate some general principles I hope to present. Also, since this particular spot on this thread contains posts from a week ago, I will not be disturbing an ongoing dialogue.
I am aware this will be a bit unusual. What I hope to do is to transplant ideas and scenarios from a past thread (which I have decided not to identify). This will be a bit more work for me, and I'm hoping the final product will be worth the effort. I do not know if this "experiment" will bear fruit. If not, I'll simply drop it, and perhaps address my concerns at another time.
In any case what I hope to talk about is the way that certain tendencies that are pervasive in the Dominator Paradigm show up on CD.
Here goes:
The main characters are:
1) A - a dyed in the wool materialist with some very fixed and certain ideas about things; and
2) B - who can be seen to some degree as representing a "New Age" (although actually this term is itself both misleading and woefully inaccurate).
Note: I participated on the above thread, but bailed when I lost interest in a "dialogue" that seemed to be going nowhere - other than to give the individuals the pleasure of "hootin,' hollerin, an' scrappin'."
As we join our heroes, I am surveying the damage following a multi-day, knockdown, drag-out battle over "reality" and "values," among other things. Again, my hope is to use this specific dialogue to illustrate a few general principles useful for the political struggle involving the life or death of democracy.
This is what I what I might say were I addressing the two antagonists.....
I had decided to re-visit this thread for 'ole- times' sake, and noticed that, days after I had left, the "battle" was still raging.
Although I had been happy to leave what seemed to be a rather fruitless discussion, upon reflecting further, I came to the conclusion that I could not in good conscience countenance what I saw happening on this thread. What I can say is that A had unintentionally offered himself and his ideas as a "foil" or background against which one's own contrasting insights may stand out more clearly.
One more thing: being human, there's only so much I choose to tolerate before calling bullsh*t when its evident that crap being offered as reasonable dialogue (or this case, monologue)!
To be clear, I do not see myself as either "judge" or "jury." What follows will be my own observations and thoughts. In these I most certainly may be way off-base or simply wrong. I have plenty of room for others to see things differently.
(Just an FYI and BTW, I will be using the pronoun "he" rather than any of the more clumsy ways of expressing gender equity - such as Heesh, Shezam man, or a favorite - "She-it!").
I'm pleased and relieved not be participating in additional discussion on this thread due to what I regarded as obstacles to mutual learning. I know that is a subjective matter - and, my assessment was that A's writing style clearly indicated that he was disabled in the area of shared discourse. And that B was playing the other side - continually feeding into what appeared to be talk that was essentially FUBAR.
What I will do is to make a good faith attempt to argue that A unfortunately represented forces of regression - the very thing he has accuses others of doing.
If I were posting on the original thread I would not have expected A to have changed his viewpoint one iota. A no doubt that A saw himself as "having a backbone," standing up for sanity, reality, and "the way things really are" - as well as being devoted to a common-sense way of approaching the topic of political revolution. I can respect that, and I believe that A's intransigence will be his loss.
From my point of view, A in fact has made a valuable contribution to the Common Dreams Dialogue - through acting as an exemplar of where not to go, perhaps like a lighthouse warning ships on a stormy sea to steer clear of treacherous shoals.
As I see it - and notwithstanding A's pseudo-certainty and colorful condemnation of others with different views - both his basic "position" and the way he has expressed it were no more useful than a vestigial organ, and potentially as dangerous as a ruptured appendix.
To Be Continued.....
Amma,
I am looking forward to reading more of your observations on this topic/issue.
Thomas Gilbert-
Thanks very much for your encouragement, Thomas. I am fond of - as Gandhi called them - "experiments in truth".
My goal is to be able to explore and learn more about how these principles apply equally to: 1) the drama from the original website, 2) responses re- SR on this one, and 3) the topic of Santorum and Romney on this thread.