I sometimes cringe nowadays when I use the term progressive because too many factions have been trying to claim the mantle of progressivism. Some have a “right” to claim that mantle and some are simply Johnny-come-latelys who think the word sounds good in their mouths. The result unfortunately is a muddying of the progressive landscape with confused political opinions and nuanced stances and perspectives which would have made any progressive shake their heads just a few short years ago. Recently I have seen quite a bit of opinion on several matters regarding the election this year. Unfortunately, not all of them are reality based, so I thought I would add some clarity to one very disturbing leap of illogic that has been bantered around lately. There is the fact that all three remaining candidates are bought and sold by corporate money and lobbyists. This is true. The leap in illogic that seems to be made then is that it doesn’t matter then who wins in 2008. That is not only inaccurate but very very dangerous and certainly not progressive.
Let’s first talk about the fact that all three remaining candidates are bought and sold by lobbyists/corporate money. This is absolutely true. McCain and Hillary are deep in bed with the Military Industrial Complex and other special interests and as Tim Gatto pointed out the other day, Obama is also bought and owned. This should come as no surprise as these are the choices the machine and their corporate media picked for you from the start. Voices like Ron Paul, who advocated taking the machine apart, were quickly marginalized by mainstream media and soon there was a willing if not giddy group of online assassins as well. I must have done close to ten articles about the message of Paul, who is not exactly what I normally would advocate. What was attractive is that he was outside the machine; or at least his message was. But most people preferred to listen to the smears and lies about him even though they offered no alternatives. I warned everyone what we would be left with was bought and sold machine candidates and sure enough that is what we have. Both parties are corrupt folks. They exist for the sole purpose of continuing their stranglehold on our republic. This became crystal clear to me when John Kerry walked away from us in the face of massive voter fraud in 2004. Ultimately, this is also why impeachment is not really an option now. The election is more important because when push comes to shove; both parties will protect each other. The machine has sold you on the notion that both sides need to hate each other but at their core, they truly do not.
Now we take the leap in illogic and discuss the notion that because all remaining candidates are bought and sold, it doesn’t matter who gets elected in November. This is of course untrue and a very dangerous thought pattern. Even though both parties are corrupt, there are certainly differences between them. There is certainly a difference between what this country would look like under President Obama and President McCain. There would be STARK differences. The first difference is the war. Under John McCain you would see George Bush on steroids. Iraq for 100 years and let’s bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran. I have heard it proffered that Obama would also not end the war and I do not buy that for one second. To be honest, I think Hillary’s move to the center and her transformation into a war-hawk are subterfuge. I think she did it to get elected; just like she does everything else. So even if she gets in, I see this war ending and the majority of the troops coming home. I also see an end to war as policy under either dem. We are talking about saving hundreds of thousands of lives folks. This is serious business.
What about the economy? Do you honestly see no difference between the two? McCain has now embraced the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and will continue along that path. Not to mention he has readily admitted he knows very little about the economy. I do not think universal healthcare will work until you fix the deficit but at least Obama will not continue the reckless policies we have seen under Bush that benefit the rich. To think otherwise is simply not reality based. Do you think that President Obama will leave Gitmo open? Continue to use torture as policy? Continue the abuses of the FISA courts? Do you think there will be a difference between McCain and Obama on the environment? How about education? Are you serious??? The differences between them will be STARK and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply delusional.
Do I want another president bought and owned by the machine? Nope; but I play in the reality in which we live. I was hopeful about Ron Paul because of the money he was able to generate from the grass roots level. People like Dennis Kucinich chose to go back to the very machine the torpedoed his candidacy from day one. It is time for progressives to realize that while the current situation may not be ideal, there is still a cause. Is there not a cause America? Is it important that we end this war and stop using war as a policy? Is it important that our kids come home and that we spare another hundred thousand people from dying simply for being born in the wrong country at the wrong time? Is it time we took back our education system, infrastructure and environment? Is it time we rejoined the rest of the world? Is it time to figure out how to pay down our debt before the dollar collapses? Is it time to stop handing back millions to millionaires while the middle class gets squeezed into the working poor? Is it time to restore checks and balances to this country and stop the expansion of the powers of the Executive Branch? Would you like to end torture? Would you like to end the government spying on you and telling you where free speech is allowed and where it is not? Is any of this ringing a bell? Have we forgotten the lessons of the last eight years? Don’t you sit there and tell me that it doesn’t matter who wins in November. It is absolutely crucial who wins in November. Do you think John McCain will change anything Bush has started? Wake up progressives. Barack Obama may not be the best hand we could have been dealt but we still need to play the hand. Think of it as macro versus micro issues.
On the macro level we have huge problems such as the two party system, media deregulation and rigged elections. These certainly need to be resolved but not when you are concentrating on the micro issues. Those issues include most importantly, electing the right people who stand the best chance of resolving the macro issues and share your common values. I had thought that some in the progressive movement have lost their way but what really seems to have happened is that the progressive movement has attracted other factions of people. Fatalists who think it doesn’t matter who runs the country. Pseudo-revolutionaries who talk a tough game from behind a computer but are spineless when push comes to shove. People who in their zeal over macro issues, foolishly believe that micro issues are somehow less important when in fact they are a pre-requisite. People who mistakenly think that personal causes and political statements are worth trading in the next 4-8 years; consigning hundreds of thousands to their deaths. Those are not the people in the progressive movement I have worked with over the past six years.
Now, I doubt anyone on either side will ever get serious about the 2-party system, but the other two areas are open for resolving and who do you think stands a better chance of ever resolving them? John McCain or Barack Obama? Is it even close? Do not be so self absorbed with faux righteousness that you lose sight of what is truly important and that is this election. Do I think that Barack Obama is a charismatic visionary? Of course not but I do know that he would be infinitely better than four more years of Bush policies. He would be better than four more years of war and death. Obama would be infinitely better on the environment, economy and education than McCain. On all the issues discussed here, these “micro” issues are at the heart of this election. It is time for progressives to keep their eye on the ball and ensure that the regressive policies of the last eight years are reversed. Only then can the macro issues ever stand a chance of being resolved.
Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 40-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess.
...why this is not the same "hold-yer-nose-and-vote-for-the-lesser-of-two-weevils" argument we have heard for the past oh... what is it... eight.. twelve... sixteen... whatever... years? Sure, I always "vote..." for the same reason the Russians showed up for work as the empire imploded: as long as the bosses pretend it makes a "difference," I'll pretend to "vote." I don't think it will matter by then, and here's why:
By November of 2008, we will be much too busy trying to secure a warm, dry place to live for the approaching Winter... let alone dealing with the $10 loaf of bread and the $20 gallon of milk with no job... the "progressive agenda" will be the least of our worries. For most of the peeps; peak oil, peak water, peak food will appear to have come out of a clear sky with no warning whatsoever. They'll be frightened... they'll be pissed and desperate. Who knows what kind of crack-brained "political" solution the bosses will offer by then?
The only sure thing is the "solution" will be one where the bosses make out... and the peeps get hosed. So... ok... if there are no roadblocks on the way to the "polling place," if there are still "elections," and if the sniper-fire isn't particularly accurate... I'll be sure and "vote" for "Obama."
by
waldopaper (11 articles, 2 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 292 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 3:44:33 PM
...why this is not the same "hold-yer-nose-and-vote-for-the-lesser-of-two-weevils" argument we have heard for the past oh... what is it... eight.. twelve... sixteen... whatever... years? Sure, I always "vote..." for the same reason the Russians showed up for work as the empire imploded: as long as the bosses pretend it makes a "difference," I'll pretend to "vote." I don't think it will matter by then, and here's why:
YOU ARE RIGHT, IT IS THE SAME THING. THE REASON WE ALWAYS END UP HERE IS THAT WE DO NOTHING DURING THE OFF YEARS. IMPEACHMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AGRESSIVELY PURSUED IN 2005, NOT 2008, FOR EXAMPLE. VOTING IRREGULARITIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED IN 2005, NOT 2008. THAT SAID, JUST BECAUSE WE ALWAYS END UP WITH THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS PROBLEM, DOESNT MAKE IT ANY LESS IMPORTANT THAT WE ACTUALLY GET THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS. WE DIDNT IN 2004 AND HUNDREDFS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ARE DEAD BECAUSE OF IT.
By November of 2008, we will be much too busy trying to secure a warm, dry place to live for the approaching Winter... let alone dealing with the $10 loaf of bread and the $20 gallon of milk with no job... the "progressive agenda" will be the least of our worries. For most of the peeps; peak oil, peak water, peak food will appear to have come out of a clear sky with no warning whatsoever. They'll be frightened... they'll be pissed and desperate. Who knows what kind of crack-brained "political" solution the bosses will offer by then?
YOU THINK IT IS ALL COMING BEFORE nOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR? NAH. WE GOT ALOT OF PROBLEMS ON THE HORIZEN BUT THEY ARE NOT COMING DUE IN 6 MONTHS.
The only sure thing is the "solution" will be one where the bosses make out... and the peeps get hosed. So... ok... if there are no roadblocks on the way to the "polling place," if there are still "elections," and if the sniper-fire isn't particularly accurate... I'll be sure and "vote" for "Obama."
NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR DIALOGUE HERE.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 4:11:50 PM
The election of 2000 when all the same argumens were made. I can't believe someone would seriously trot this nonsense out again after 8 years of Bush and the Republicans.
by
kenstory (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 8 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 9:23:48 PM
I used to believe much of what you've written; I no longer do.
First, let's dispense with one myth. Many third party voters do not believe there is no difference between the parties or between the candidates. While some may argue there is no difference, I believe there are many differences. In my view, however, that's the wrong question to be focused on. In my view, the right question is whether either party is going to bring about the changes we need to survive. If the answer is no, the strategy, my strategy, becomes one of seeking the quickest route to meaningful power.
The current "real" military budget exceeds $1.1 trillion. Just for argument's sake, let's say you agree that with military spending at that level, the Treasury will go bankrupt, the social safety net will be disbanded or weakened, education will suffer, health care will suffer, jobs will suffer, the elderly will suffer, the middle class will suffer, the infrastructure of the country will suffer and on and on and on. I see no evidence that either party or any of its candidates has called for significant reductions in defense spending. In fact, I believe all the major candidates would "grow the military."
I don't want to get into an Obama versus Clinton versus McCain rant. Suffice it to say that your comments on Obama and education left much unsaid. Has Obama called for deep cuts in defense to fund education? Do you support Obama's statements that he's open to federally funded private and religious schools? This would be a disaster for public education. The point for me, again, is not whether he's "better than McCain", it's whether by his words and his deeds he has convinced me he has the right values and the right policies. He hasn't!
You seem confident that the Democratic candidates are likely to end all this warfare. I just saw an interview with Obama where he talked about the burden Iraq was putting on the US military. Did he want to bring home all the troops and cut expenses so he could fund various domestic programs? Well, that's not what he said. He said because of Iraq, we have severe shortages of men and materials in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Should that give anyone confidence that the Democrats are the peacemakers and the Republicans are the warmakers?
I see no label other than "lesser of the evils" for what you're advocating. I see that as a "valid" voting strategy. I've done it myself in the past. The problem is, though, that if we keep voting for people who will not bring about the radical changes we so urgently need, the gap between rich and poor will continue to widen. The influence of big corporations and big money in Washington will continue to grow. US foreign policy, and most domestic policies too, will be for the corporations, by the corporations and of the corporations. If you haven't read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" I would strongly encourage you to do so. By the way, on another subject, the Democrats' response to global warming is tragically inadequate.
There are differences between the parties. My admittedly silly analogy goes something like this. The Republicans will set us adrift in a tiny canoe and then tip over the canoe. The Democrats will also set us adrift in a tiny canoe and will also tip over the canoe. The difference is that the Democrats will also see to it that every canoeist is outfitted with a life preserver. Yeah, I guess that's better than what the Republicans are offering. Until the "dominant paradigm" is changed, regardless of which party gets in, we're all just circling the drain.
So, what's my great solution you might be asking? Well, the truth is that I don't have a great solution. It seems to me that until we can build some form of a base of power, whatever our values and beliefs are will find zero representation in Washington. The blood, sweat, tears and treasure of most Americans are being stolen and exploited by those with the power to do so. They will steal everything that's not nailed down and then they will steal the nails and whatever's left.
I advocate voting for third parties. I'm not naive enough to believe that third parties, especially given the undemocratic rules that the two major parties have imposed, have any chance of becoming viable anytime soon. So, again, what's the point?
The point is that we should not view third parties, in the near-term, as viable political parties. However, we should view them as an opportunity for "political union", i.e. building a political voting bloc with somewhat unified goals. Third parties can give progressives a forum for political discourse. Third parties can give progressives a vehicle through which we can speak with one voice. If we could grow our numbers to say 3% or maybe even 5% of the vote, the Democratic Party might just need to make a few concessions to us instead of treating us the way they treated Kucinich during the debates. The cut out his tongue and "invisibled" him. If the Democrats still refuse to negotiate, we continue to try to grow at their expense. Progressives need to unify and we need to grow our numbers. As long as "lesser of the evil" voters see themselves as so pragmatic and so mature and see third parties as the height of irresponsibility with no logical purpose since "they can't win", trust me, America and Americans will continue to circle the drain.
You can laundry list away on all the horrible things that will happen if Republicans get in. You would have no argument on this from me. And still, I will tell you that what the Democrats are offering will not save us from our oppressors and they will not save us from global warming and they will not save us from the ravages of failed capitalism. If we continue to enable them, there is no path to change. None. That's the illogic I see in your position and the one I once held.
In the end, we either are represented or we are not. In the end, we either have a share of power and a voice or we do not. In the end, we either vote to enable the "lesser of the evils" status quo or we try to build an opposition however hopeless or unlikely that might be.
Some will float by, buoyed by their life preservers, and feel they've done the best they can with the choices they see. Others hear the thunderous drop of the waterfall just ahead and know that it's time to start paddling in a new direction no matter how strong the currents are against them. With the two major parties, we'll keep floating downstream with our without our life preservers. The alternatives may be longshots but I'd suggest exploring them. The current path leads to a very unpleasant ending.
by
welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 7:00:12 PM
I can understand your frustration but short of crawling into a ball until Jesus comes, what would you advocate? I agree that third party candidates would be attractive but in the current fixed system, they are just not viable. I like Cynthia McKinney but she has ZERO chance. If you cast your vote for her and McCain gets in, what have you wrought?
You ask about deep military cuts to fund education. That is your "dream" scenario. What about smaller dreams for now? how about someone who is willing to bring home the majority of the troops as opposed to one who may end with a draft? Baby steps, cmon. Then when Obama is in, you immediately start working on serious campaign reform so that 3rd party candidates have a level playing field. Difficult? Sure but easier than trying to do it in an election year!
I am sorry but if you honestly see no difference between America under Obama versus McCain, i guess it doesnt matter but nothing i said in this article is inaccurate. Will we get the environment we want? No but it will be demonstrably BETTER than under McCain. Will we get the education solutions we truly want? No, but it will be BETTER than under McCain.
It is time to stop the end of the world chorus and play the hand we have been dealt. President Obama is not my first choice believe me, but he is CLEARLY BETTER than McCain.
Change is a step at a time.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 11:28:59 PM
You stated: "I am sorry but if you honestly see no difference between America under Obama versus McCain"
Is that what I said? No, actually it isn't.
I said: "Many third party voters do not believe there is no difference between the parties or between the candidates."I referred to the "there's no difference" argument as a myth.
Here's the bottom line. We have to have massive defense cuts or we're dead. The Democrats are NOT going to do it. We have to have radical proposals, at least in the short-term, to address global warming. I'm talking about severe restrictions on auto use. I'm talking about mandatory "work at home" programs. I'm talking about cutting the defense budget in half to fund wind and solar research. The Democrats are not going to do it. Their cute little CAFE improvements and their 15% alternative energy (by 2020) result in NO NET CHANGE to CO2 output by the year 2020 due to increased energy demand. And continuing to import oil beyond the 15% alternative fuels the Democrats propose is going to bankrupt the US Treasury.
Radical change is needed; not baby steps. There is no time left for baby steps. That's not a political assessment; it's a scientific assessment of global warming and it's a financial assessment of the budget disaster. The major parties will always play it politically safe. They don't have to solve the very real problems we have. They just have to offer ideas that are more appealing than the other guys. Vote for me because I'm better than them is not the same as vote for me because I can solve the problems we have. We just can't afford the lesser of the evils anymore.
You're demanding of me to provide answers in a situation where maybe 1% of the population sees the crises we're in the way I do. We have to start somewhere. I see people who understand the corruption and the total inability of either party to address the problems as people who need to be convinced to choose something other than "lesser of the evils." The very notion that you're going to bring about change by voting for millionaires who have succeeded in rising to power in the current system makes very little sense. Those in office are not and probably never will be change agents.
Yeah, fine, Obama may be less of catastrophe than McCain. I see no change to the massive military budget under either. I see no hope of repairing the endless list of domestic problems if there's just no money in the budget. Retirement security, education, health care, infrastructure repair ... it just ain't going to happen no matter how pretty the promises are. And global warming? The real solutions, if it's not already too late, are not politically palatable to the major parties. I've seen numerous analyses of global warming. We could be talking hundreds of millions of deaths. We could be talking no fresh water in the southwest and in Florida. We could be talking about fantastic sea gates in major cities to hold back the tides. We could be talking aboust massive disruptions to our overly centralized agribusiness. What are the solutions we're offered? We'll be told to put in our cute little light bulbs and Detroit will be forced to squeeze out a few more miles per gallon. It just isn't enough.
The point? There is no room left for baby steps. We need to seize power. It hard to see that happening inside a party that won't even let Kucinich participate in the debates. The Democratic Party motto is give us your money and your votes and shut the hell up. Enabling those who silence your vote leads nowhere. We are truly at the brink of hell and we are not organized and we are not educated and we are not really even motivated to take charge of our own destinies. We are sleepwalking. It may very well be too late to avoid what awaits us. At least we can try to start building something new. Voting for status quo political parties is a dead end.
Here is the final paragraph of Chalmers Johnson's "The Sorrows of Empire":
"There is one development that could conceivably stop this process of overreaching: the people could retake control of the Congress, reform it along with the corrupted elections laws that have made it into a forum for special interests, turn it into a genuine assembly of democratic representatives, and cut off the supply of money to the Pentagon and the secret intelligence agencies. We have a strong civil society that could, in theory, overcome the entrenched interests of the armed forces and the military-industrial complex. At this late date, however, it is difficult to imagine how Congress, much like the Roman senate in the last days of the republic, could be brought back to life and cleansed of its endemic corruption. Failing such a reform, Nemesis, the goddess of retribution and vengeance, the punisher of pride and hubris, waits impatiently for her meeting with us."
by
welshTerrier2 (7 articles, 3 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 105 comments)
on Sunday, February 24, 2008 at 12:20:56 AM
You offer revolution during the American Idol Generation? And you think that is going to work? No offense, but let me know how that turns out for you.
It didnt take a day to get us into this mess it sure as hell aint gonna take a day to get out of it. There is reality and must decide the best course of action within the reality in which we live. Unless you think you can seriously alter reality, which i seriously doubt.
But thanks for the exchange.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Sunday, February 24, 2008 at 4:15:43 PM
All these people who consider themselves 'progressive' had this incredibly potent bond - hating Bush (and by extension the Republicans in general). There didn't need to be a deeper connection because the Dems were sorta under the radar, getting off easy, using the right rhetoric.
But now the Dems are being put under the microscope, the facade is cracking and the differences between all these factions, the lack of foundation, are coming out. All the people who don't want to think about social and economic theory or root causes have no grounding anymore since the Bush II reign is coming to an end.
The electoral process serves to keep the facade, although it's failing this time around. The fact that elections in the US are not based on solid platforms of a party, but rather personalities - people within the same party fighting madly over (superficial) differences in policy...again, this stops the electorate from having to examine what the basic philosophy really is. But it really is failing.
Cognitive dissonance abounds.
Throw in all the folks who aren't really Dems but don't really know what they are, or former disgruntled Dems, and this 'progressive' crowd falls apart even further.
It's amazing how narrow the political perspective is in this country, The bastards have really done a bang-up job at keeping the American people clueless.
But these online folks, these political 'activists' and 'writers' spend enough goddamn time on politics that they have no excuse. They are just equivocating and perpetuating the status quo just like the politicians.
-MM
by
coyote (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 10:14:08 PM
Look, i agree with you substantively. I agree that the machine has done a masterful job of pumping the populace full of american idol while the country is looted. I can sit and biatch and moan about it and throw my hands up in the air or I can do what is best. I tried to advocate for Ron Paul, who would have worked to undermine alot of the machine apparatus. I was greeted with derision and now we are left with what we are left with.
What would you advocate we do? Short of grabbing pitchforks and marching on DC, which we both know will not happen with the apathetic electorate we now have, what would you advocate? Granted the dems are "corruption lite" at this point but is there not some validity in the lesser of two evils? Shouldn't we try at least?
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 11:34:47 PM
There are those who want a "savior" who will assume the office, wave a magic wand, and make everything that George Bush has done to disappear while others would prefer to arm themselves with pitchforks and storm the ramparts of Washington. The restoration of our democracy will take years of careful attention and correction. Getting Bush out and someone of another party in is only the first step. Then we must advocate in any manner available to us to keep the pressure on both the President and Congress to move in the right direction. It's going to be a long, hard road.
by
Mary Pitt (60 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 159 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 10:21:06 PM
You are right of course. It took years to get us buried in this situation and it will take years to correct it. The truth is the people who talk the toughest are also thiose who have no intention of picking up a pitchfork. Thus they slam anyone who is trying to advocate for what is best but offer nothing as an alternative.
Heck, i can sit here day after day and jump into every thread and say, "nope thats not going to work, everyone is evil!" but at the end of the day what woudl I have contributed?
Is Obama a panacea? Of course not but he is as Mary says, a start. We need to start somewhere. Get Bush out, get a dem in that can work with the dem congress to start reversing some of the damage done during the Bush years. Will we get everything? No, but we will get some. We will start.
Thanks Mary.
by
Anthony Wade (135 articles, 2 quicklinks, 44 diaries, 440 comments)
on Saturday, February 23, 2008 at 11:38:15 PM
...and it aint "voting" for hoodie or loodie or Rudy Kazootie. Swell "entertainment," but believing that "voting" is any kind of "solution" is nonsense. "But you offer no 'solutions'" is the standard saw for "democrats" and other extinct species. Sharpen that saw and use it to cut some wood.
There is no "political system," there is no "country." They're gone... and you can't "get them back." "Revolution" is like shooting a hurricane. "Voting" is like peeing in one. There will be no real "politics" until after the die-off. "Elections" in the US are for entertainment purposes only. The future will be green...
...one way or another.
by
waldopaper (11 articles, 2 quicklinks, 18 diaries, 292 comments)
on Sunday, February 24, 2008 at 1:00:37 AM
