THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW REPUBLICANS…CAN THE GREENS BECOME “THE NEW DEMOCRATS”?

11 09 2016

Today’s date, September 11th, is, to borrow President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s words, “a day that will live in infamy.” On this date in 1973, Salvador Allende, the Bernie Sanders of Chile, salvadorallende_251who, unlike Bernie, had succeeded in become his country’s President, was killed in a military coup that had the full backing of the United States and especially our then-Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger. The Chilean military, with the assistance of the United States, didn’t just take out Allende. They jailed, tortured, and murdered thousands of Chileans, and forced tens of thousands more into exile. The US then used Chile as a base for “Operation Condor,” which orchestrated the murder of thousands of mostly non-violent left-wing activists all over South America, most notoriously in Argentina, where “the dirty war” killed at least thirty thousand people. That’s a US government program, directly approved by Henry Kissinger, that targeted people like me and, probably, people like you. So, when I think about Hillary Clinton, who has repeatedly declared her admiration for Henry Kissinger, being President, when I notice the approbation with which her followers greet any mention of her faults or approval of the Green Party, when I read that a Clinton-supporting PAC has budgeted a million dollars to pay Clinton supporters to harass Sanders supporters and Greens on the internet, I start feeling a little nervous, and since today is the anniversary of the Chilean Bernie Sanders being murdered by Hillary Clinton’s inspiration, this becomes a more emotionally charged anniversary than it would be if a protegée of Henry Kissinger were not so likely to be our next President. Donald Trump is dangerous because he doesn’t really seem to have a plan.

readyforoligarchy

Do not think about a Green Party!

Ms. Clinton, on the other hand, is dangerous because she does seem to have a plan–and it’s not one she’s sharing with the general public. With a horde of pundits and bloggers ready and willing to bend the truth to discredit any criticism of her, not to mention discrediting the critics themselves, I start wondering if we have a “Ministry of Truth” in our future.

 

Oh yeah, it’s also the fifteenth anniversary of the day a bunch of Saudis apparently hijacked several US airliners and flew them into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, killing a mere three thousand people. OK, it was three thousand all at once, not one by one, but…. Anyway, because the Saudis did that, the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. If that makes sense to you, then you can accept the World Trade Center story exactly as the mainstream media portray it. It doesn’t make sense to me and I don’t accept the story, but that’s not what I’m here to talk about today. The Allende-Kissinger story is much more apropos. Read the rest of this entry »





NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS

10 11 2012

I have a confession to make.  In spite of my profound intellectual and political distaste for Barack Obama, I did, in fact, feel physically relieved to wake up last Wednesday morning and find out he was still President, and that the country had rejected Mitt Romney and all he stood for.

Let me make this absolutely clear:  I am not “glad Obama is President.”  I am reasonably certain that everything Glenn Greenwald says in his “The Obama tradeoff” paragraph is what a lot of well-meaning people in this country think, consciously or unconsciously:

Yes, I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the hundreds of thousands for no good reason, and the CIA able to run rampant with no checks or transparency, and privacy eroded further by the unchecked Surveillance State, and American citizens targeted by the President for assassination with no due process, and whistleblowers threatened with life imprisonment for “espionage,” and the Fed able to dole out trillions to bankers in secret, and a substantially higher risk of war with Iran (fought by the U.S. or by Israel with U.S. support) in exchange for less severe cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, the preservation of the Education and Energy Departments, more stringent environmental regulations, broader health care coverage, defense of reproductive rights for women, stronger enforcement of civil rights for America’s minorities, a President with no associations with a racist religion, and a more progressive Supreme Court.

Please note that climate change and peak resources don’t even enter this equation. But….Obama’s ostensible “liberalness” has sucked so-called “progressive Democrats” into accepting all the short-sighted spending priorities,  infringements on our rights and liberties, and outright war crimes that they protested vigorously when these same moves were attempted by the Cheney administration.  The morally compromised position of having accepted this from a Democrat would have made it awkward for these “liberals” to protest further restrictions coming from a Romney administration, which presumably would have taken an even more bare-knuckles approach to foreign and domestic policy.

Romney was, after all, raised in a homophobic, repressive, misogynistic, anti-small d democratic religion that, until 1978, held as official doctrine that having “black skin and a flat nose” was the “mark of Cain,” and would not allow African-Americans to take part in its ceremonies, let alone become priests. That’s about as gross as racism can get.  Mitt Romney was 31 years old in 1978, a fully responsible adult, and for the first ten years of his adult life, he “approved that message.”  Barack Obama is only the public relations image of a more racially tolerant society, but, in spite of the vast sums of corporate money spent to persuade voters to let an even more voracious fox guard the henhouse, and in spite of a tsunami of laws intended to limit the number of non-rich citizens who could vote,for the most part the spirit of sharing and open-mindedness prevailed over the spirit of narrow-minded selfishness.

And it’s big money’s failure to prevail, in the wake of the Supreme Court’s notorious Citizens’ United decision, that is probably the best news about this election. But there were other bright spots. Read the rest of this entry »





AS WE FILL OUR PETRI DISH/PLANET…..

28 10 2012

Pre-election frenzy is reaching its heights here in the U.S., as foaming-at-the-mouth insanity runs neck and neck in the polls with cool, calculated insanity, and the world holds its breath to see whether the current faction  of thugs will retain control, or whether a crew that is even more out of touch with reality will take the reins in America.  Mitt Romney, in contrast to many Republicans, says he recognizes that the climate is changing, but denies human causation.  Obama admits that humans are the cause of the problem, but won’t do anything that will actually stop it.  The subject has been off the political radar in this election.

Meanwhile, on the weather radar, we have a nearly unprecedented, very late-season hurricane bearing down on the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., and forecasters are saying it’s likely to merge with a nearly unprecedented,very early season winter storm system that’s been making its way across the country, possibly wreaking havoc when the two systems have a party over the next couple of days.  (Gee…the two-party-system meets the two-system party!).  This follows a year of record drought, which shrank crop yields in this country and elsewhere, and has sent global food reserves to their lowest level in 40 years.  This, too, is “off the radar.”  As far as the duopoly  candidates are concerned, reality is, in general, “off the radar.”  This failure to acknowledge reality could destroy the planet.  Our political system is not just insane, it is suicidally, and ecocidally, insane, a danger to itself and others.

In the midst of all this madness, what’s a David to do but battle Goliath?  What’s Lot to do but warn Sodom and try to awaken enough righteous people to save it, especially since, this time around,  there is no place to go to get away from impending destruction?

That’s why we in the Green Party keep making what effort we can to turn the tide. Read the rest of this entry »





MILLION DOLLAR BLOCKS

28 10 2012

One of the dirty open secrets about “the land of the free” is that, here in America, we have more people in our prison system than any other country in the world.  Here’s the numbers:  as of 2010, there were 2,267,000 people behind bars in America, with 4,934,000 additional Americans on probation and parole.  Fourteen million Americans are “former felons,” who will be handicapped for the rest of their lives with difficulties in being hired or receiving government assistance such as grants or loans for schooling, not to mention the shackles on their minds that all too often  from a stint in prison.

The good ol’ USA is way out in front of the number two imprisoner of human beings–Russia.  The US incarceration rate in 2009 was 743 per hundred thousand, fifty percent ahead of the Russians and Rwandans, both of which clock in at around 560 per hundred thou.  By contrast, only 71 out of every hundred thousand Norwegians is imprisoned.  In Holland, where legal marijuana sales should , according to the DEA, have precipitated a massive crime wave, the incarceration rate is 94 per thousand…hey, maybe they’re just too stoned to bother arresting people….or too high to go out and commit crimes?  And, when Republicans say they don’t want America to be like Europe, is this what they’re talking about?  Is this really a field in which we want America to be “number one”?

Ooh, but aren’t we keeping hordes of violent criminals off the streets?

No, not really.  About eight percent of the roughly two hundred thousand people in federal prison are there for violent crimes.  That’s about sixteen thousand people.  About half the roughly 1.3 million people in state prisons are in for violent crimes–that’s about 650,000 people.  And approximately a fifth of the three-quarter million individuals in local jails are there for violent crimes–that’s about a hundred and fifty thousand people.  When you add it all up, that’s slightly over a third of all prisoners locked up for violent crimes, about 816,000 out of roughly 2.25 million, with two-thirds of those in jail, about one and a half million people, locked up for non-violent, frequently “victimless,” crimes, at a cost to taxpayers–that’s you and  me–of around thirty-six billion dollars a year.

What’s a “victimless” crime?  About half of all federal prisoners are jailed for drug convictions of one kind or another–that’s a hundred thousand people.  A fifth of state prisoners have committed drug crimes–that’s about a quarter million people.  Statistics aren’t available for local jails, but that leaves us with a third of a million of the million and a half people in state and federal penitentiaries locked up for “drugs.” Read the rest of this entry »





THE FEAR FACTOR

13 10 2012

The national media continue to be fixated on the Rombama-Obomney horse race, in which we witness two guys who are either clueless or totally insincere joust to see who can utter the most popular and soothing platitudes, and who can best galvanize their supporters with fear of what will happen if the other guy gets elected.  I cringe to think of what will happen no matter which of them gets elected.  They are both advocating policies that put not just the American people, but all life on the planet, directly in harm’s way.  “Dangerous to self and others” used to be grounds for involuntary commitment to a psychiatric hospital and forced medication.  When did it become politics/business as usual?

A man who was a teacher of mine for many years used to point out that inducing fear in people is a way to manipulate them into doing something they wouldn’t go for unless they were afraid–like being the bottom level of a hierarchy, the level that takes the most stress and receives the least benefits.  Some of the big fears that are  being manipulated in this election revolve around questions of family planning, abortion, and sexual choice. I humbly submit that the reason there are clear-cut differences between Republicans and Democrats on these issues is that they are not questions that impact corporate bottom lines, even as they do play on peoples’ deep conditioning.  It’s called “getting people by the short hairs,” and it’s a particularly nasty form of manipulation.

My old teacher also liked to use the metaphor of “pulling a band-aid off a hairy leg” when talking about going through personal changes. Do it fast, he meant, otherwise you just prolong the agony.  By that standard, I suppose we would  be better off if Mitt Romney gets elected, since his flavor of psychopathy is obviously much less in touch with reality than Barack Obama’s, and his proposed “solutions” will make things much worse for more people a whole lot faster.  RIP that band aid right off!  Lots of pain for lots of people.  Not pleasant, I agree.

On the other hand, we have Obama’s seductive, I’m-on-your-side brand of insanity, which attempts to placate the increasingly deprived masses with a few more crumbs from the table of the one-percenters.  The fact that this can be successfully sold as “socialism” to a significant number of American voters simply indicates how many ignorant people there are in this country.  Not necessarily stupid, mind you, but ignorant.  That’s an important distinction.  Ignorance can be cured.

That’s why Jill Stein and  the Green Party continue to campaign.  “Teachable moments”–times when people are open to new information and a new point of view–will occur at an increasing rate as the changes our society and our planet are undergoing accelerate.  There is still time for sanity to prevail. Read the rest of this entry »





“REALISM” AND JILL STEIN

9 09 2012

Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala are running the strongest Green Presidential campaign  the party has yet seen.  While Ralph Nader, it’s true, had greater name recognition, Ralph’s personal style is not very “green.”  He is very much a my-way-or-the highway kind of guy, which sharply diverges from the Green value of grassroots democracy.  Stein and Honkala have incorporated Green values into their campaign organizing, generating an enthusiasm that has enabled them to raise sums of (noncorporate!) money far beyond what the Party has been able to summon up in previous elections, qualifying the Green Party for Federal matching funds, and even breaking into TV advertising.

Modern media maven that I am, I put  Jill’s pitches on my Facebook page, where, sure enough, one of them generated some pushback.   A long time friend, whom I appreciate for his thoughtful approach to life, wrote:

“Your protest and donation vote will accomplish what?…..If there’s no one who you like who can win, why not give your dough to some person who is starving or has a life threatening issue or something like that….don’t you think it would have more direct impact….everyone can spin an exciting story if they don’t have to execute the vision….the only difference between a hallucination and an inspiration is the execution.”

To which I replied:

“Why not give your dough to some person who is starving”?  Because I’d rather get ahead of the game and end the conditions that allow people to go hungry.  “….or has a life threatening issue”…..the Republican and Democrat programs are life threatening, endangering all life on the planet for the sake of short-term corporate profit.  Greens have “executed our vision” in numerous governments around the world, generally with positive and popular effects.

As Michael Lerner said, “Realism has been defined by the powerful and the media they control to mean any policy that does not significantly challenge the current distribution of power and wealth. So I say, “Don’t be realistic.” The God revealed to the Jewish people is a God that makes it possible to overcome systems of power and domination, starting with the liberation of the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. All people, who are created in God’s image, can aspire to transcend the constant voices from outside and from inside our own heads that insist we accommodate ourselves to the existing reality rather than change it.”

So, friend, why are you such an apologist for the sorry state of the status quo?

I could also have thrown in Dom Helder Camara’s well-known bon mot, “When I feed the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist.”  Or, in this post-communist era, “they tell me I’m being ‘unrealistic’.”

Let’s talk about this “be realistic” thing a little.  Read the rest of this entry »





ROMBOMACARE INDUCES EPIDEMIC OF LONG-TERM MEMORY LOSS!!

7 07 2012

i was much less surprised than most people, it seems, when the Supreme Court, in one of its notorious 5-4 decisions, upheld the so-called “national health care plan” that has become known, among both its revilers and defenders, as “Obomacare.”  My lack of surprise came from two considerations:  what this law mandates, and where it originated.  What is surprising to me is the seemingly complete lack of public awareness of the broader context of this struggle.  But hey, this blog is called “Deep Green Perspective,”  not “Shallow Green Snap Judgement,” so if you’ve been following me for a while, it’s because you expect the long view.  Here goes.

Obamacare was upheld by the widely unexpected swing vote of Chief Justice John Roberts.  It makes perfect sense to me that Roberts would vote to uphold this godsend for the private insurance industry.  The Bush-Cheney stacked Supreme Court has never turned down an expansion of corporate power, has it?  So, in a sense, this decision was an extension of “Citizens’ United.”  Not only do “corporate citizens” have the “right” to spend freely in order to influence elections and legislation, those of us who are mere flesh-and-blood citizens  must give them our money so they have plenty of funds to expand their prerogatives.

But the really bizarre part of all this political drama is that everybody seems to have forgotten where the basis of “Obamacare” originated.  Republicans denounce it as “socialism,” Republican governors vow to do what they can to block its implementation in their states–which they can do, since part of the Supremes’ decision struck down the part of the law that mandated expansion of Medicare, and Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney vows to repeal the law if he is elected.  On the other side, Democrats cheer the Supremes’ decision, viewing it as a somewhat unexpected “liberal” victory.

All this sturm-und-drang conveniently ignores, or forgets, the actual origins of Obama’s health plan.  May I remind you that Obama got the basics of it from the plan Mitt Romney passed when he was governor of Massachusetts?  It should be called “Romboma Care”–credit where credit is due! And may I remind you that Romney received the plan from the Angel Moroni–oo;s, no, that’s the Joseph Smith story–but, by the way, what does it mean that the Founding Angel of the Mormon faith has a name so dangerously close to a derogatory term for a person with a dull intellect?  But I digress….The plan Romney passed in Massachusetts originated with the deeply reactionary Heritage Foundation, spiritual home of Newt Gingrich, founded by Joe Coors, Paul Weyrich, and Richard Mellon Scaife.  The Heritage Foundation, whose patron saint is Margaret Freaking Thatcher.  Moloch!

thanks to the Platzner Post for this!

And so, all America’s Democrat Party “liberals” are celebrating a Democrat President’s implementation of a reactionary, corporatist “health care plan,” as if it were a great victory.  And somewhere, Spiro Agnew, who is reputed to have predicted, “This country is going to swing so far to the right that you won’t believe it,” somewhere Spiro Agnew smiled. Read the rest of this entry »





BARITT ROMBAMA IS A SHOO-IN; GREENS WILL CONTEST ELECTION ANYWAY

12 05 2012

Maybe, just maybe, the shift is hitting the fan for the one percent.  One of this last month’s big stories has been that several of America’s megacorporations have been embarrassed enough by public exposure to stop funding the American Legislative Exchange Council, which in turn has been embarrassed enough by the flood of negative publicity it has received to at least officially abandon its efforts to enact legislation that limits voting rights.  On the other hand, they can afford to–so much damage has been done to ballot access by now so that, coupled with the background level of media hypnosis, Mitt Romney might actually have a fighting chance to unseat Barack Obama, and end the shame of Amurrica’s perceived leader being the spawn of a white woman who got careless with one of the darkies…..excuse me, I know that’s horribly politically incorrect, I’m just trying to express what it seems to me that a lot of people are thinking, but are simply too polite to ever say–although one Evangelical Christian friend of mine was willing to go so far as to tell me, before the 2008 election, “It’s not right for a person of Muslim descent to be President of the United States.”  That remark has been enough to give me some satisfaction in knowing that Barack Obama’s sold-out butt is the one sitting in the Oval Office, just because of the cognitive dissonance it creates for so many Right-thinking Americans, but Barack Obama is much closer to Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, or, for that matter, Mitt Romney and Ronald Reagan, than he is to Rev. King or even Jesse Jackson, let alone Malcolm X, despite the pervasive right-wing rhetoric about Obama being a “socialist.”  Hey, they call him a “socialist” because they couldn’t get away with calling him a n–and neither could I, so I’m not gonna say THAT word.  I have my limits!

Indeed, the similarities between Obama and Romney are remarkable enough that I, among many others, apparently, am tempted to refer to them as “Barritt Rombama”  and “Mitrack Obomney,” or belittle them as Tweedledim and Tweedledimmer.  Both are the best candidates money can buy, and their images are carefully crafted to appeal to their target demographics, one wing or the other of the tragically vast majority of Americans who are still asleep and dreaming the American Dream.  Obama’s image is meant to appeal to those who believe they are more open-minded, generous, and tolerant, while Romney’s message is intended to galvanize those who feel more sure of themselves, sure about what’s right and wrong and who are inclined to believe that people should be allowed to sink or swim on their own abilities.

If that were what is really going on, it would be wonderful, but that’s not what’s really going on.  What’s really going on is that the forces behind both the Democrats and the Republicans are thieves who are ripping off the world, and the big difference between them is that the Democrats want to distract the guard dog by throwing it a bone, while the Republicans would rather just shoot the dog.  Both, however, are equally intent on taking everything they can get their hands on while the getting is good.  Just where they will go with their ill-gotten gains is certainly a good question, but, apparently, being clever–and stupid– enough to be the expert thieves they are does not mean that they have the wisdom and foresight to be thinking of the long-term consequences of their actions.  Somehow

“Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will some people realize that they cannot eat money.”

has failed to register in the consciousness of the people who think they own America.    If you stay in the sphere of mainstream politics, it’s all about how to get consumption growing again, without even a moment’s reflection on, for example, the fact that “consumption” is an archaic name for tuberculosis, or, in the words of that other environmental core statement,

“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.”

Thanks to Edward Abbey for that one.  Authorship of the “last tree” quote is a little harder to track down, but it seems to originate with the native people of this continent, who, to their credit, have seen this coming and have been trying to warn us clueless white folks about it for several hundred years.  Oh, well, I guess the Green Party is not the first batch of Cassandras to appear in America!

And I guess this is the point at which to mention that the Cassandra Society of Tennessee, aka the Green Party of Tennessee, will be meeting for a nominating convention next Saturday, May 19th, at the Scaritt-Bennett Center in Nashville.  You can get the details on our Facebook page or website, but the essence is that we will be designating our official candidates for various state and national  offices, and deciding whether to endorse Roseanne Barr or Jill Stein as the party’s Presidential candidate.  The comedian or the doctor?  The country could use a good dose of both.  Anyway, there are a great many more offices open than we can contest from among our usual ranks, so we are hoping that dozens, or hundreds, or at least a handful of Green-minded citizens will come out of the political woodwork and stand for office under the Green Party banner this year.

Let’s take a music break

Richard and Mimi Farina, “House Un American Blues Activity Dream”  (the first link goes to the recorded version of the song, the second to a live, acoustic version with a more interesting video)





F-BOMBING AMERICAN POLITICS

8 01 2012

Please note:  I’m going to drop a lot of f-bombs in this segment and the next.  In politics, however, the f-word that is not spoken in polite society has nothing to do with plowing or the union of male and female.  In politics, the f-word that should never be uttered is “fascism.”  I’m going to utter it frequently over the next couple of segments, so don’t say I didn’t warn you.

For the first time in a while, I’ve got a “truth in strange places” award to mention,  but first, I want to give a “truth tellers in strange places” award–to Bradley Manning, for showing the world the dirty linen of the American Empire, sowing the seeds of Arab Spring, and spawning the “Occupy” movement here in America, a movement that has only begun to come into its stride.  The mills of the gods grind slow, but exceeding fine, and have only just barely caught the shirt-tails of the elite in their inexorable grasp.  As William Kunstler likes to say, “it’s going to be a great show from the cheap seats.” And here we are, and no wonder the gummint is so mad at the man.

So yes, Bradley Manning gets the “Truth-Tellers in Strange Places” award.  Corporal Manning should be up for a Nobel Peace Prize, but instead, he has spent nearly a year and a half in prison before even having any charges brought against him.  During this time, he has been repeatedly humiliated, kept in solitary confinement, and probably drugged .  Two thoughts come to mind:  one is that if this is what our government will do without the recent detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act, what will it feel emboldened to do with that permission?

The other thought is that the government wants to make damn sure nobody else gets any noble ideas about following the path blazed by Daniel Ellsburg, who became a folk hero for leaking “The Pentagon Papers,” which, like Mr. Manning’s alleged gifts to Wikileaks, gave the lie to America’s loudly proclaimed noble intentions. Sibel Edmonds is another great American whistle blower, but, unlike Ellsberg and Manning’s cases, her revelations were largely ignored by the complacent mass media of the early aughts.  Since then, the internet’s ability to spread a story widely without benefit of the so-called mainstream media has grown exponentially, so that, even though the U.S. can hobble Wikileaks financially, it has been unable to shut it down or stop the truth from being told. For all his campaign promises about hope, change, and openness, Obama has been even harsher than his predecessors when it comes to prosecuting whistle blowers instead of listening to them.

Here’s hoping 2012 is the year when Bradley Manning soon receives the hero’s welcome he deserves.

Our “Truth in Strange Places” award goes to Dr. Ron Paul, who should need no introduction.  No matter what you think of the full spectrum of his politics, no matter whether or not you trust that he has moved beyond the simple-minded racism published in his name twenty years ago, he is the only Presidential candidate who actually challenges the status quo in any way.  His ad asking people to imagine the American response to a Chinese or Russian military base in Texas puts the shoe on the other foot in a way that nobody else in the race had the vision, brains, or nerve to do, and it’s too bad that it, and the warning it carries about blowback from American imperialism, will likely not be appreciated until foreign drones cruise American skies and Americans are “specially rendered” for crimes against the Chinese or Russian state. Paul’s willingness to admit that the “War on Drugs” is an extremely costly failure is another breath of fresh air, but, beyond that, Paul actually turns out to be cut from the same cloth as the rest of the Republican pack, whom he joins in calling for the radical downsizing of the U.S. government and the unleashing of corporate power.

Downsizing and muzzling the U.S. government is not actually an issue between the Dems and Repubs, although both like to pretend it is.  The Democratic leadership, just as much as the Republicans, is committed to serving corporate interests first, and the public second.  That is why nobody central has been prosecuted for the Wall Street meltdown, why banks have gotten trillions in relief while foreclosed homeowners and the unemployed have received only table scraps, why, instead of a genuine overhaul of our so-called health care system, we got a law mandating that we buy health insurance from the companies who have helped make the U.S. health care system the most expensive and dysfunctional in the world, not to mention one of the chief conduits for channeling the wealth of the American middle class into corporate coffers.  Corporatism is the latest evolution of the political “F-word”: fascism.  In a corporatist/ fascist political system, the government exists to serve the needs of corporations, to encourage the people to be submissive, because, “What is good for General Motors” (or any other “too-big-to-fail” corporation) is good for America.”  You know, “the trickle-down theory.”

So, what is the likely choice the Democrats and Republicans will give American voters this year?  In the words of Glenn Greenwald, an Obama supporter will have to think:

Yes, I’m willing to continue to have Muslim children slaughtered by covert drones and cluster bombs, and America’s minorities imprisoned by the hundreds of thousands for no good reason, and the CIA able to run rampant with no checks or transparency, and privacy eroded further by the unchecked Surveillance State, and American citizens targeted by the President for assassination with no due process, and whistleblowers threatened with life imprisonment for “espionage,” and the Fed able to dole out trillions to bankers in secret, and a substantially higher risk of war with Iran (fought by the U.S. or by Israel with U.S. support) in exchange for less severe cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, the preservation of the Education and Energy Departments, more stringent environmental regulations, broader health care coverage, defense of reproductive rights for women, stronger enforcement of civil rights for America’s minorities, a President with no associations with racist views in a newsletter, and a more progressive Supreme Court.

We can choose the lesser of two evils–or refuse to choose evil at all.  That’s why the Green Party runs Presidential candidates, at this point–not because we have any hope of winning, but to give people of conscience a real choice.  I have many friends who tell me it is pragmatic, even principled, to vote for the lesser of two evils.  Maybe it’s right for them.  I just know that I couldn’t look myself in the mirror if I knew I had voluntarily supported evil, lesser or not.

The Clash, “Spanish Bombs

Let’s have an “Alice in Wonderland” moment:

When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
    “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
    “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master      that’s all.”

Now, let’s jump about a hundred and thirty years closer to the present with this quote from political writer Ron Suskind.  Formerly a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, he is certainly no flaming radical, and unlikely to have made this up:

The aide(probably Karl Rove) said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” … “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” 

Am I alone in seeing a parallel between the words of Humpty Dumpty and the words of Karl Rove?

Let’s talk for a while about this business of shrinking the government and letting private industry grow, to which the Dems and Repubs both seem committed. It ties in with the Republican assault on labor unions.  The purpose of unions and the purpose of democratic government are the same—a way for people to join together to deal with something bigger than an individual human, whether the bigger thing is an invasion, a natural disaster, a need to maintain the commons—or a large, possibly multi-national, corporation. Those who call for the shrinking of the state and the destruction of labor unions, but do not at the same time call for diminishing the power of the corporate sector, are not populists, as they like to style themselves. They are fascists.  Fascism always seeks, in the name of the people, to shrink the power of the people and grow the power of the elite.

In the words of FDR,

“The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”

As I understand Roosevelt’s words, and as I understand what’s going on in America today, we have slid far down the road to fascism.

Another front on which the GOP has pushed inequality has been their sometimes successful attempts to disempower women by limiting their access to health care, contraception, and abortion, even in the context of rape and incest.  I don’t have enough time tonight to give you the nasty details of this, but you can read the whole rap sheet at this link.  This is a rich subject, and I may do a whole story on in next month.

Here’s my take on the contest for the Republican nomination:  The GOP’s kingmakers will never, ever let Ron Paul anywhere near the Presidency, and, indeed, most Republicans are far too hypnotized to ever accept him.  Mitt Romney will likely be the nominee.  Because Romney’s Mormon faith is so distasteful to the party’s evangelical wing, who largely consider Mormonism a pagan religion, Rick Santorum or someone like him will get the VP slot, so as to bring in the faithful, just as Sarah Palin served John McCain in the last round.

This ticket is still extremely problematic.  First of all, Romney carries the baggage of having designed the program Republicans now revile as “Obamacare,” and it will be funny to watch him try and shake that one off.  Second, for all the GOP’s touting of the uber-wealthy as “job creators,” Romney made a whole lot of his uber-wealth in the 80’s running a firm, Bain Capital,  that bought American companies and slimmed or shut them down, or moved them overseas, reaping enormous benefits for CEO’s and investors, and disaster for working Americans.

And Santorum?  Back in the 1930’s, Sinclair Lewis said, ” “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”  Rick Santorum is the guy wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.  In his own words:

We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold—Griswold was the contraceptive case—and abortion. And now we’re just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you—this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it’s my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that’s antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it’s polygamy, whether it’s adultery, where it’s sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family….. society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be.

Another example of Rick’s rhetoric:

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is, I think, the dangers of contraception in this country.  Many of the Christian faith have said, ‘Well, that’s okay. Contraception is okay.’ It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

Folks, this kind of talk is straight out of the Nazi playbook.  He wants to put the government in your bedroom to make sure you don’t use birth control or do anything he thinks is kinky, because sex is for reproductive purposes only, dammit.  Why is it so much fun, then?  That’s the Devil tempting you to self -indulgence!

bUT….while Santorum makes pronouncements that warm the hearts of conservative evangelical Christians, he himself is actually a Catholic.  Will evangelicals give it up for a pagan and a papist?  Or dredge up the just-as-batshit-crazy/sexually repressed. but thoroughly Protestant, Michelle Bachman?  Or find some other Stepford wife/husband?

So that’s the choice America faces in 2012–between Obama, a whore for the corporatists, and Romney/Santorum or his equivalent, a corporatist pimp and a narrow-minded, repressed bigot.  Or, there’s kicking over the table, which may become more and more likely as more and more Americans realize, with Tim DeChristopher,

Once I realized that there was no hope in any sort of normal future, there’s no hope for me to have anything my parents or grandparents would have considered a normal future—of a career and a retirement and all that stuff—I realized that I have absolutely nothing to lose by fighting back. Because it was all going to be lost anyway.

But he worked through his despair:

“How the hell could people accept this? This is outrageous.” And I think that’s one of the things that the wilderness does for us, you know, it allows us to live the way we actually want to live for a while. It puts things in the perspective of, “Wait, this isn’t inevitable. It doesn’t actually have to be this way. And this isn’t the way I want to live. It’s not okay.” I think activism at its best is refusing to accept things. Saying that this is unacceptable.

With or without access to the wilderness that healed and nurtured Tim DeChristopher, he is far from the only person coming to the twin realizations that the current situation is totally unacceptable, and he has nothing to lose in opposing the corporatocracy–or creating something different that meets genuine human–and planetary–needs.

You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.





OBAMA THE SOCIALIST AND OTHER DELUSIONS

12 03 2010

First, a little “I told you so.”  In August of 2008, I wrote the following words:

the Repugs probably are not going to steal this election, because they would rather let the Dims be the ones to fumble around and make idiots of themselves trying to clean up the mess that eight years of out-front pillage has made of the country. It’s much easier to criticize than it is to govern, after all…I should know that!

A great many of my liberal friends are totally thrilled that a dark-skinned man with the middle name of Hussein is going to be our next President. But I think the “Hope Honeymoon” will be over mighty fast, and the next four years will be no love feast for Barack Obama or the Democrat party. While I agree that he will be a better President than John McCain, I think we are in for a long series of increasingly bitter disappointments.  Let me tell you some of what I see coming down the road.

First of all, there is the misperception that Barack is a populist candidate.  He makes every effort to portray himself that way.  His demeanor and delivery are disarming and informal.  He does not come across like a stereotypical politician, but when you read the fine print you discover that he acts like one.

He is getting the bulk of his support from Wall Street.  It is good that the banking gang has recognized that the Bush Junta is not acting in their best interests, but the fact that they have settled on Obama means that he is unlikely to do the things he should to reign in big money’s influence on this country.  Obama has already signaled his willingness to play along with the bankers by his support of the so-called “Class Action Fairness Act of 2005,” which severely limits the ability of private citizens, or even States, to sue corporations.  The NAACP,  the ACLU, and the National Organization for Women, as well as fourteen state attorneys-general, all pleaded with Congress not to pass this Republican-sponsored legislation, but Obama spoke out for it….

Well, the only part of  my prediction I would disagree with at this point is the speculation that Obama is a better President than McCain would have been.  It looks to me like the Repugs are so out of touch with reality that if they had taken the reins of power, we would be a lot further off the rails by now, and further into creating whatever is going to come next….yes, I know it would be draconian and tragic, but think of it as the political equivalent of ripping a band-aid  off a hairy leg….do you want to go slow and agonize over the pulling of each and every individual hair, or just feel all the pain at once and yelp and get it over with?

And, certainly, the Repugs are totally stark raving batbleep crazy.  The fact that so many people have fallen for the ludicrous charge that Obama’s healthcare plan, which proposes to bail out the for-profit insurance business to the tune of  sixty billion dollars, is “socialist”  is a symptom of serious malaise in the body politic. Obama’s proposal is basically the same plan Republican Mitt Romney instituted in Massachusetts, although Mitt drank the kool-aid and claimed in his Presidential campaign that making everybody buy private insurance was ““European-style socialized medicine.”  Tell it to the Europeans!

Can you say “lacking integrity,” boys and girls?

The Romney/Obama plan does nothing to lower the exploitive rates charged by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, or doctors who think their M.D. is a license to become a millionaire.  It ain’t “socialism,”  it’s a feed trough for capitalist pigs! but I digress….

I am simply amazed at how many people in this country are ignorant enough to label a corporate shill like Obama “socialist,” not to mention that many of these same people believe climate change and peak oil are fabrications for the purpose of introducing “one world government,” and are obsessing over whether Obama is really an American citizen and whether his mother was married when he was born and what they will do when he orders in UN troops in black helicopters, instead  of seeking real solutions to the very real problems we face.  If just a few people were babbling about these fantasies,  they would be considered insane.  Unfortunately, there are millions of people who share these paranoid delusions, and they are a serious political movement. This fog of unreal and groundless accusations completely distracts these people from identifying the true sources of misery and oppression in their lives, whether that’s our corporate overlords or the demons in their own heads.

Yes, the demons in their own heads.   I know, this is a political rap, what am I doing talking about demons, for cryin’ out loud?

OK, demons, in this case, means neuroses, misperceptions, faulty programming like, “if you can’t control yourself, control someone else,” “the most emotional person in the room gets to run the meeting,” and other axioms of psychological power play.  Does that make sense to you?

We like to pretend that we are polite and civilized and ruled by our intellects, but for most of us, that is a sham.  When the pressure is on, as it is now, all that outer husk stuff blows away in the blink of an eye, and all too many of our fellow citizens revert to their inner two-year old, screaming bloody murder and falling flailing to the floor because Mommy won’t give them titty, or their favorite toy, or because it’s nap time and they’re fixated on what they’re doing but too tired to keep doing it happily.  It’s no way to run a country, but it’s what we’ve got to work with.

In spite of the fact that, at least as recently as November of 2008, a sizeable majority of Americans knew that the Repugs are the problem, not the solution, the Dims have been dim enough to discourage a lot of their former supporters, who now seem amnesic enough to return the Repugs to power, in which case they will screw things up even more.  Here and there, where an election is local enough so that face-to-face contact can win out over media barrages, the Green Party will make some inroads, but neither we nor anybody else with sense and solutions is likely to come to power in this country.

It’s sad and poignant.  We are not only poised at the close of the American Empire, we are poised at the decline of human civilization as we have always known it.  We will never again be this wealthy and this powerful.  We are about to run out of cheap oil and the weather is about to go nuts, but nearly everybody is partying like the good times are going to go on forever.  They’re not.  The last two hundred years have been a deluded dream.  We are about to be rudely awakened, and will have one mighty hangover when we come to our senses.

music:  Greg Brown, Worrisome Years








%d bloggers like this: