 |
|
Add to My Group
|
July 29, 2008 at 10:29:03
Obama Supporters Victims of Political Slavery by Kevin Gosztola Page 1 of 2 page(s) |
|
 
|
The work of Bruce Dixon, Glenn Greenwald, Chris Hedges, Naomi Klein, David Lindorff, John Nichols, John Pilger, and Jeremy Scahill, and the journalistic integrity of Amy Goodman (whose show Democracy Now! might be the only news show that has attempted to hold the Obama campaign accountable to the people with beliefs and values it claims to support) has kept track of Obama’s shift from fake populist to pure corporate Democrat. As Chris Hedges wrote in April 2008, the left has lost its nerve: The failure of the American left is a failure of nerve. It has been neutralized and rendered ineffectual as a political force because of its refusal to hold fast on core issues, from universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care for all Americans, to the steadfast protection of workers’ rights, to an immediate withdrawal from the failed occupation of Iraq to a fight against a militarized economy that is hollowing the country out from the inside. Let the politicians compromise. This is their job. It is not ours. If the left wants to regain influence in the nation’s political life, it must be willing to walk away from the Democratic Party, even if Barack Obama is the nominee, and back progressive, third-party candidates until the Democrats feel enough heat to adopt our agenda. We must be willing to say no. If not, we become slaves.
Chris Hedges gets what most Americans do not. Further down in this article, Hedges pinpoints the problem with the left in even more concise terms:
The failure of the left is the failure of well-meaning people who kept compromising and compromising in the name of effectiveness and a few scraps of influence until they had neither. The condemnations progressives utter — about the abuse of working men and women, the rapacious cannibalization of the country by an unchecked arms industry, our disastrous foreign wars, and the collapse of basic services from education to welfare — are not backed by action. The left has been transformed into anguished apologists for corporate greed. They have become hypocrites…
…Hope, St. Augustine wrote, has two beautiful daughters. They are anger and courage. Anger at the way things are and the courage to see they do not remain the way they are. We stand at the verge of a massive economic dislocation, one forcing millions of families from their homes and into severe financial distress, one that threatens to rend the fabric of our society. If we do not become angry, if we do not muster within us the courage to challenge the corporate state that is destroying our nation, we will have squandered our credibility and integrity at the moment we need it most.
Anger and courage have rarely been seen within the ranks of people pushing to elect Barack Obama over John McCain in November. An unsubstantiated fear that challenging Obama could affect his success in the election coupled with an unsubstantiated belief that Obama is for “change” has turned a historic election into a nightmare.
Seemingly, Obama supporters have adopted a tunnel vision of this election choosing to ignore the need and wide support for urgent political reform. Supporters caught up in Obama’s cult of personality have lost sight of the political bigotry that erodes our democracy and when asked to confront it, they have had little problem with simply ignoring our broken electoral system.
The peculiar behavior of the left leads one to question, specifically, its duplicity.
Why do progressive and liberals who have organized against Democrats and Republicans against impeachment or ending the wars and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan subvert their causes by committing themselves to supporting a Democratic candidate that seeks to end a war in Iraq and start two more in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
Why do bloggers and activists from the left support a candidate who thinks Iran poses a “grave threat” to America? In the thesaurus, “grave” is synonymous with apocalyptic, baneful, hellfire, ominous, and fire-and-brimstone. It’s also synonymous with dangerous, serious, and severe. Such a belief that Iran is a "grave threat" clearly is an AIPAC-influenced or neocon-influenced one and is no different from the Bush administration's belief on Iran.
Why do concerned citizens who attend such conferences like the National Conference for Media Reform, the Take Back America Conference, and the Netroots Nation Conference allow a so-called liberal campaign to steep itself in corporate interests bent on corporate welfare fueled by corporate greed?
Why do those for peace, justice, liberty, and freedom fear breaking the stranglehold of a system that many believe forces you to vote against your interests and conscience until after November when it is possible to go back to fighting for the policies and values America should uphold and stand for?
Why do Americans every four years give up the power they are supposed to have during an election by agreeing to play the rigged game that is electoral politics?
At this point, the American people who support Barack Obama yet complain about taxes, the “war on terror”, the loss of civil liberties, home foreclosures, the rising costs of gasoline, food, and health care, etc., and the criminal conduct of the Bush administration are doing a disservice to themselves by supporting a candidate who has surrounded himself with people who would rather bail out corporations than the poor, working, and lower classes that need help the most.
1 | 2
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 14 comments |
|
Stealing votes from minor party candidates?
I wouldn't have thought that such a thing were possible. I know my vote is bestowed upon a candidate, and not stolen from anyone, as by virtue of my citizenship in this republic, it belongs to me by right until I designate a recipient. We can argue about whose view of minor parties (the term is better than third party since there are too many of them to all be third) is more or less politically sophisticated or moral or responsible and come to no conclusion. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting, and it will be some time of observing events that will allow us to judge the merits of those arguments. If we guess wrong now, there will likely be very hard lessons to learn. I have to say, though, if you can't see any difference between Barack Obama and John McCain, you just aren't looking. by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1791 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:30:29 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Well how about this, John?
Since you most often disagree with my view of Obama, please help me understand--- What are the differences between McCain and Obama? Please tell me what you find to be different. by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:36:39 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Thank you,...
for making my point. by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1791 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 6:19:37 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: What point?
It's okay if you don't know the difference. I am not sure that there is much difference so if you would like to enlighten me please do. Or, you can post odd comments that do not promote dialogue. Look, I'll admit there's one difference. Democrats are different than Republicans because unlike Republicans, Democrats will at least pretend to be for the little guy. by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 9:29:42 PM (0+)
|
|
Though I gave up on Obama long ago,
I recently wrote an article that I can't publish here do to the rules on abusive language. Obama's stance on the Palestinian crisis has angered me to no end. Though I was a life-long democrat, Pelosi, Obama, and the DNC's actions through-out the primary process has convinced me that the Democrats have long since abandoned the precepts of FDR, Kennedy, and Carter. I am done as a democrat. I will not vote for Obama, nor McCain. If you wish to read that artcle I spoke about, go here. by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:55:46 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: I gave up long ago too
But I am unwilling to give up on the American people. I think you probably think or feel the same way. Your passionate piece against Obama is excusable in my opinion. I wouldn't mind reading it here on OpEdNews even if it breaks the rules. Why? Because it shows the frustration we all are feeling. How we handle frustration will determine whether we save this nation. by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:06:55 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: frustration is good...
it is the foreplay of democracy. by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:36:52 PM (0+)
|
|
Obama Vs McCain
Obama is a great American. Win or lose he has done this country proud. McCain is also a great American. But let us ask ourselves. Who will look out for "We the People"? I believe the choice is obvious and timely. Vote Obama and vote for your future. by David Pittis (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Tuesday, Jul 29, 2008 at 10:56:27 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Let's use empiricism and fact when discussing differences
Obama is a great American. How? Why? What makes him great? What makes him greater than McCain? What makes McCain less of a great American than Obama? Win or lose he has done this country proud. What has he done to make this country proud? Why doesn't it matter if he wins or lose? Why will we be proud either way? But let us ask ourselves. Who will look out for "We the People"? What makes you think Obama will look out for "We the People" better than McCain? What makes you think McCain will do a terrible job of looking after "We the People"? I believe the choice is obvious and timely. Vote Obama and vote for your future. Why is it obvious? Why is it timely? Why is a vote for Obama a vote for our future? Why is a vote for McCain more of a detriment to our future than Obama? by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:43:58 AM (0+)
|
|
Christian the lion
Take a break! Sweet story breaking on today show this morning. check it out! by Lew Ranger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 48 comments) on Wednesday, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:06:14 AM (0+)
|
|
Good news!
Here's good news: Obama's dirty, divisive campaign has already destroyed the Democratic Party. by Perry Logan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 557 comments [74 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jul 30, 2008 at 6:25:29 AM (0+)
|
|
Obama is a capitalist, what we need is a socialist party
Obama is a capitalist. Democrats are capitalists. Capitalists only benefit the upper-classes (Business-owners) and the corporations. Lockheed, Boeing and AIPAC fund Obama's campaign. So Obama would have to be loyal to the corporate lobbies. Only a socialist united party can save USA by LincolnMarx (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 86 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:27:02 PM (0+)
|
|
Lets start a grand united jeffersonian-socialist party
Why don't we start a grand united jeffersonian-socialist party of the United States of America. by LincolnMarx (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 86 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:28:26 PM (0+)
|
|
Explaination Needed
Comment from Ratings: This article is a tiresome repetition of numerous nearly identical articles and comments that have already been contributed on this web site. These articles complain that electing a Democrat will not solve the problems of the society and they seem to suggest that not voting would be a better approach. I understand that many people, probably including the author are very frustrated that the election of a majority of Democrats in the House and a very, very slim majority in the Senate did not solve all of the nations problems. Personally I do not find this surprising, but I understand that these people may gain some emotional satisfaction by not voting for Democrats this time around (if you try something once and it didn't succeed, to hell with it). What I don't get is what good all of this non-voting could possibly do for the country. How this help is not at all clear to me and it cries out for a clear explanation. Let us assume that everyone reading OpEdNews decided not to vote, what is the theory of what would happen? Exactly how would any of the problems of the country or of the world be solved? How would the would be better? What mechanism would lead to any improvement? Sorry, I just don't get it. by PrMaine (13 articles, 13 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 510 comments [22 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:08:33 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
