OpEdNews Op Eds

The 2006 elections and the coming train wreck: Does it matter if we slow down the train?

Become a Fan
  (5 fans)
By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

As I stood in line for coffee on the morning after election night, a Democratic Party supporter ahead of me in line said, "Thank God this country is finally switching trains."

If only that were true.

On Election Day 2006, the U.S. public didn't switch trains but simply ratified a different group of conductors.

It's the same old train, on the same tracks, heading in the same direction.

This isn't an argument that there are never any meaningful differences between politicians; sometimes it does matter who is giving the orders on the train. But on this day after the morning-after, it's crucial for those with a critical perspective to highlight that this train -- contemporary U.S. society -- is barreling forward toward disaster, no matter who's punching tickets.

Here's the unavoidable reality: Our train is on an unsustainable course in cultural, political, economic, and ecological terms. In a predatory corporate capitalist economy in an imperial state -- a system that values the concentration of wealth and power, and devalues people -- certain things are inevitable:

--Our deepest values concerning justice and solidarity will be undermined by the anti-human values of capitalism and empire.
--Truly democratic politics, in which ordinary people have a meaningful role, will be subverted the concentration of wealth.
--An increasingly fragile economy mired in self-indulgent deficit and debt, with an artificially inflated currency, will start to collapse when our military and political power are unable to keep the rest of the world in line.
--The ability of a finite planet to sustain life as we know it will diminish dramatically in a system based on fantasies of unlimited growth marked by the glorification of domination.

The train moves forward, as the vast majority of Democrats and virtually all Republicans avoid these realities. Where can such a train take us? Pick your metaphor.

--It could be that the train tracks end at a cliff, or
--it might be that the train is heading for a brick wall, or
--perhaps the train will derail along the way, or
--maybe the tracks will simply end abruptly and the train will run into the ground.

If we don't take radical action relatively soon, every ending we can imagine is likely to be brutal and violent, deadly not only for most of the world's population but also for the non-human world. This isn't irrational apocalypticism but a rational approach to the evidence in front of us. No one can predict how this will play out, but it will most certainly play out ugly unless we change the trajectory.

Many who would agree in some fashion with such an assessment will say, "Yes, but at least electing Democrats might slow down the train." With a reactionary right-wing Republican Party in total control, the train is hurtling forward at 100 miles per hour, according to this position, but with Democrats in charge the train might slow down to 90 miles per hour.

Theoretically they could, though I hear little coming from Democratic Party leaders that suggests they will pursue policies that will significantly turn from an unsustainable capitalism or a profoundly immoral empire. Instead, they talk of different strategies and tactics for managing those systems.

But, for the sake of argument, let's assume that Democratic Party rule could slow down the train and buy us more time. If nothing is done to change the direction of the train, the end remains the same. So, the important question is, what can we do with that time -- not off in an abstract future, but now?

The small amount of time we might gain will be meaningful only if we confront the harsh reality that the systems that shape our world -- capitalism and empire, rooted in white supremacy and patriarchy -- are fundamentally bankrupt and indefensible, yet deeply rooted in our culture.

When I make this point, I'm often told by liberals and progressives that I'm not being realistic, that ordinary people won't listen to such analysis. That's not my experience. When I have tried to articulate this worldview in plain language in recent political talks, I have found that a growing number of people not only will listen but are hungry for such honesty.

Of course not everyone agrees -- not anywhere near the number needed for a mass movement right now, and certainly not a majority -- but one wouldn't expect that in this affluent society in which many people are still insulated from the consequences of these systems. But more and more people, from many sectors of society, are facing these realities, and we are searching for a community in which to confront this together.

Our political work should focus on connecting with people on common ground, and then working to shape a radically new vision of justice and sustainability. The time for that is now; the direction and speed of the train dictate that we not put it off any longer. It's time to dig in for what one writer has dubbed "the long emergency."

I think that in the two years to come before the presidential election, pressing this kind of analysis is the crucial political work for those committed to left/feminist/antiracist values and progressive politics. Rather than fussing about how to persuade Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean of the need for radical action, let's take that message to ordinary people, who are more likely to listen.

This isn't about who can be most radical for the sake of being radical -- it's about whether we can be realistic. Such an approach cannot promise political transformation in the short-term, but I believe it is the only hope for our future.

 

Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin and board member of the Third Coast Activist Resource Center. His latest book, All My Bones Shake: Seeking a Progressive Path to the Prophetic Voice, was published in 2009 (more...)
 
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

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.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The paradox of pornography

The Collapse of Journalism/The Journalism of Collapse: New Storytelling and a New Story

Great television/bad journalism: Media failures in Haiti coverage

Struggling to be "fully alive': Reports on coping with anguish for a world in collapse

“Crash” and the self-indulgence of white America

From Start to Finish: Why We Won and How We Are Losing

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
3 people are discussing this page, with 3 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
The significance of the elections 2006 is not in w... by Mark Sashine on Thursday, Nov 9, 2006 at 7:53:20 AM
Good article. Jack... by Jack Purcell on Thursday, Nov 9, 2006 at 7:58:51 AM
In response to the four main points above, I would... by Daniel Geery on Thursday, Nov 9, 2006 at 8:36:10 AM