look my point aint about obama, clearly he got mad swag and compared to mccain and white masculinity's fantasy palin he is a better candidate. but thats comparative. of course i hope he wins, but since he will win ny i can go ahead and vote green since i want to help build an alternative since obama himself, not what we say or want from him, but he himself has clearly told us his politics. and his politics are no different than bill clintons who also swept the pregressive imagination when he ran. so we are always in this boat. and i dont support greens cause i see people excited about them, based on others excitement i should vote obama, i support them cause i think regular people can actually help shape that party more than they can the Dems and for me politics is about actual political engagement not $20 online, shit churches get ppl excited and mad loot and i aint joining them! the greens or any other independent politic will only grow if we grow it. thus if we dont see them as an option the question is do we want to see them as an option and if so why and what will we do to make them/ourselves an option.
same with PR shit right?
personally i like obama and really feel rodstarz's open letter to him but like rodstarz says, based on obamas stated politics and our evaluation of where we need to go to make shit better and i dont mean REVOLUTION, its hard to support obama. hard for those of us who are revolutionaries in intent, easy for regular peeps who are not even thinking about protesting him, like we do. thats a clear difference.we are clear that we will be protesting him and we rather him than mccain. but others think his administration will make shit better, we just think we will have more leeway to struggle to make things better. a vote for greens wont make shit better, but either will voting for obama. real solutions come from real political struggle. thats why iam trying to help build an alternative, not the green party but a third party. what if yall are wrong, what if he, true to his word, is another clinton (welfare, prisons, etc) and is the black face of a "postracial" empire. will the ground be easier for us to struggle or less so. the distinction is that some of us think that the illusion is what will make it harder for us, and we think this because of history not ideology. the dems are and have always been the burial ground of the Left. thus i support independent politics where i can (like mass and ny). but if i was in miami i would vote for obama, cause that would be damn near revolutionary. so its not one size fits all, its about analyzing the particular conditions, the specific conjuncture, the historical moment.
saulo
Thursday, October 30, 2008
elections debate
my 2 cents on this debate: since there is no one rev Left view, I will express a particular socialist perspective. the end of apartheid in s.africa also facilitated capitalist globalization there, apartheid was a crutch for the capitalist class, the end of jim crow helped consolidate and strengthen american capitalism against a weaker section of southern capitalists, the entrance of women into the labor force served as an excuse for capitalists to lower wages for all and end the patriarchal "family wage", the gain of labor laws excluded Black domestics and Mexican farmworkers; the election of the first Black president facilitates the maintenance and renewal of american hegemony?!
all these are examples of struggles for democracy and liberation where diverse forces were in contention bout goals, leadership, etc. while rev. socialists (a term i understand to refer to Trots not just soc who are rev) argued that these struggles could end up being coopted and that independent politics was critical to preserving what was being fought for, other Leftists argued for working with, moving towards, the mainstream (the people or masses if you read Maoists) in a popular front against reaction, fascism etc (sound familiar?!). this meant they said they were critical of but would support and at the same time would not create an alternative institution as part of being critical of.
i am voting for the mckinney/clemente ticket because i think we need to create alternative institutions because thats how we create democratic structures that will last, develop political leaders,establish collective accountability. while this is, should be, true for all structures, I just point this out in the context of elections and parties because it is important that we create political collectives (primer or parties) where people can join and feel its a space of de-alienation. therefore, while i think theres a time and place for not-voting (and while in PR i didnt vote cause I was clear that even minor changes were due to the grassroots), that has to be decided based on the particular conjuncture of forces and interplay with the political structure. but I dont agree with not-voting as a principle, i think that dismisses a whole arena where many people are located and suggests they cant be moved or wont agree with us. thus we dont engage or even try to influence them. Do we think they wont/cant budge?
while its true that there might be only a dimes worth of difference between dems and republicans, that dime might mean alot. having said that, i still wont vote for Obama because I am more fearful of not trying to build the seeds of the future now, and that the choices we make will end up smacking us in the face later. sure mccain scares me but little did "we" know we should of really been scared of bill clinton. my point is not just that we might have more room for justice with obama but that the capitalists will have more room for exploitation with obama.
i mean why do they supprt him as much as "we" do? bush/neocons have been bad for capitalism, like this current crises. yet, the level of opposition under Bush (like giuliani) has been huge and has helped to revitalize movements. havent we all been busy these last 8 years!
do we think there will come a time to attempt building alternatives?
or how will long-lasting fundamental change be made possible?
remember, many of us were schooled by the generation that got radicalized because they finally grasped the system and the Dem/liberal role in it. they went from radicals to revolutionaries because they turned away from the Dems/liberals/progressives and thus inspired the world!
saulo
all these are examples of struggles for democracy and liberation where diverse forces were in contention bout goals, leadership, etc. while rev. socialists (a term i understand to refer to Trots not just soc who are rev) argued that these struggles could end up being coopted and that independent politics was critical to preserving what was being fought for, other Leftists argued for working with, moving towards, the mainstream (the people or masses if you read Maoists) in a popular front against reaction, fascism etc (sound familiar?!). this meant they said they were critical of but would support and at the same time would not create an alternative institution as part of being critical of.
i am voting for the mckinney/clemente ticket because i think we need to create alternative institutions because thats how we create democratic structures that will last, develop political leaders,establish collective accountability. while this is, should be, true for all structures, I just point this out in the context of elections and parties because it is important that we create political collectives (primer or parties) where people can join and feel its a space of de-alienation. therefore, while i think theres a time and place for not-voting (and while in PR i didnt vote cause I was clear that even minor changes were due to the grassroots), that has to be decided based on the particular conjuncture of forces and interplay with the political structure. but I dont agree with not-voting as a principle, i think that dismisses a whole arena where many people are located and suggests they cant be moved or wont agree with us. thus we dont engage or even try to influence them. Do we think they wont/cant budge?
while its true that there might be only a dimes worth of difference between dems and republicans, that dime might mean alot. having said that, i still wont vote for Obama because I am more fearful of not trying to build the seeds of the future now, and that the choices we make will end up smacking us in the face later. sure mccain scares me but little did "we" know we should of really been scared of bill clinton. my point is not just that we might have more room for justice with obama but that the capitalists will have more room for exploitation with obama.
i mean why do they supprt him as much as "we" do? bush/neocons have been bad for capitalism, like this current crises. yet, the level of opposition under Bush (like giuliani) has been huge and has helped to revitalize movements. havent we all been busy these last 8 years!
do we think there will come a time to attempt building alternatives?
or how will long-lasting fundamental change be made possible?
remember, many of us were schooled by the generation that got radicalized because they finally grasped the system and the Dem/liberal role in it. they went from radicals to revolutionaries because they turned away from the Dems/liberals/progressives and thus inspired the world!
saulo
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
New Messages, New Threats
New Messages, New Threats
The African World
By Bill Fletcher, Jr.Executive Editor
October 23, 2008 - Issue 296, BlackCommentator.com
http://www.blackcommentator.com/296/296_aw_messages_threats.html
The 'Joe the Plumber' story has unraveled, yet Senator McCain
continues to make reference to what is, in fact, a mythical
character. Sure, there is a Joe, but he is not what he
described himself to be. This has been exposed. Yet, McCain
continues to reference 'Joe the Plumber' as if to lend
credibility to his story.
It would be easy enough to laugh off the story of a white man
who would like to believe that he will, someday, be the
person that he presented himself to be, but the story tells
us as much about the consciousness of many middle income and
working class whites as it tells us about the propaganda
strategy of the political Right.
It is not just that Joe the Plumber, aka Joe Wurzelbacher,
aka Sam J. Wurzelbacher, is not the person that Senator Obama
believed him to be. Wurzelbacher, to paraphrase Frank
Sinatra, seems to have 'high hopes,' that is, he is prepared
to ignore his current situation of being a low to moderate
income, working class, single parent who would benefit from
Senator Obama's tax plan. Instead, he has embraced an
identity that makes it easier for him to identify with the
politics of McCain/Palin.
This incident highlights the desperate attempts by a section
of the white working class to find some means to identify
with a candidate who has a platform and approach contrary to
their short and long-term economic interests. There are only
three ways to pull that off, and Joe the Plumber found one:
invent a new identity. A second way is to focus on issues
that have little to do with one's living standard, i.e., so-
called cultural issues. The third way is to simply
acknowledge that one cannot vote for a Black man.
Yet the Joe the Plumber incident also tells us something
about the messages being advanced by the Right, and
specifically, by the McCain/Palin campaign. In a fit of
desperation, the McCain/Palin campaign is suggesting that it
does not matter whether or not Joe the Plumber is a myth. In
fact, the McCain/Palin campaign has refused to acknowledge
that the story is just this side of a hoax. Rather, they
continue to reference this man as if his story is completely
credible. In doing this, they raise, once again, the
irrationalist side of their right-wing politics. In effect,
the McCain/Palin campaign is saying that facts are
irrelevant.
Wurzelbacher's aspirations speak to the dream of climbing the
ladder of success and upward mobility, a dream that has
proved to be a myth for many; a myth that has been preached
to all citizens and residents of the USA, but absorbed
largely by the white population. It is a myth that says if
you work hard, you advance; if you are dedicated to your job,
your living standard improves; and if you work hard and prove
your value to the company (and to society) the living
standard of your children will always be better than your
own.
So, the question that arises is simple but profound: what
happens when one finds out that this story line is true for
only small numbers of people? There seem to be 2-3 answers.
One can get angry and recognize that one has been hood-winked
by the system and, as a result, turn on the system, i.e.,
move to the Left. In the alternative, one can feel betrayed
and turn on those who one perceives to have been the source
of the betrayal. Or, one can engage in fantasy, and pretend
that one's current circumstances are only temporary, to soon
be replaced by something a lot better.
Wurzelbacher is currently fantasizing, but this fantasy can
easily morph into option #2, or the right-wing populism about
which I and others have been warning. In either case, options
#2 and #3 correspond to the message that sections of the
political Right wish to advance. They say, in essence, that
the only reason that you - the white worker or white small
business person - are not succeeding has little to do with
the system, but has to do with the 'other.' In the case of
the current economic crisis, the problem for McCain and the
Right is not the system, but a few greedy individuals. This
is the sort of message that Wurzelbacher wants to hear. The
message goes: there is nothing wrong with the system; there
is nothing that should really stop him from becoming the
person he wants to believe he can be; the only obstacles are
some greedy, shady individuals, and, quite possibly, the tax
plan of a Black man that allegedly might take money away from
him…money that he does not currently possess.
The myth that surrounds Joe the Plumber is a powerful one. It
is a myth that many people insist on believing despite a
great deal of evidence that it is largely a fraud. Although
whites have always had a relative advantage over people of
color, this has never meant that whites automatically succeed
or rise to the upper crust. Nevertheless, in challenging the
myth, one is calling into question a belief system that so
many people, particularly within white America, have grown to
accept.
Senator Obama has described the current economic crisis as
being far more than a crisis created by some individuals. He
has pointed to the results of thirty years of deregulation.
This is an important contrast with Senator McCain. Yet it is
not enough. Wurzelbacher/Joe the Plumber, and others like
him, deeply wish to believe the myth with which they have
grown up. The myth in its entirety must be shattered. That
can only happen by confronting the truth that the current
economic crisis and the thirty plus year decline in the
living standards of the average working person are not the
result of some 'other', e.g., Jews, Blacks, minorities,
immigrants, but, as I raised in my last commentary, are the
result of a very amoral economic system.
[BlackCommentator.com Executive Editor, Bill Fletcher, Jr., is the Executive Editor of BlackCommentator.com, a Senior Scholar with the Institute for Policy Studies, the immediate past president of TransAfrica Forum and co-author of the book, Solidarity Divided: The Crisis in Organized Labor and a New Path toward Social Justice (University of California Press), which examines the crisis of organized labor in the USA.]
The African World
By Bill Fletcher, Jr.Executive Editor
October 23, 2008 - Issue 296, BlackCommentator.com
http://www.blackcommentator.
The 'Joe the Plumber' story has unraveled, yet Senator McCain
continues to make reference to what is, in fact, a mythical
character. Sure, there is a Joe, but he is not what he
described himself to be. This has been exposed. Yet, McCain
continues to reference 'Joe the Plumber' as if to lend
credibility to his story.
It would be easy enough to laugh off the story of a white man
who would like to believe that he will, someday, be the
person that he presented himself to be, but the story tells
us as much about the consciousness of many middle income and
working class whites as it tells us about the propaganda
strategy of the political Right.
It is not just that Joe the Plumber, aka Joe Wurzelbacher,
aka Sam J. Wurzelbacher, is not the person that Senator Obama
believed him to be. Wurzelbacher, to paraphrase Frank
Sinatra, seems to have 'high hopes,' that is, he is prepared
to ignore his current situation of being a low to moderate
income, working class, single parent who would benefit from
Senator Obama's tax plan. Instead, he has embraced an
identity that makes it easier for him to identify with the
politics of McCain/Palin.
This incident highlights the desperate attempts by a section
of the white working class to find some means to identify
with a candidate who has a platform and approach contrary to
their short and long-term economic interests. There are only
three ways to pull that off, and Joe the Plumber found one:
invent a new identity. A second way is to focus on issues
that have little to do with one's living standard, i.e., so-
called cultural issues. The third way is to simply
acknowledge that one cannot vote for a Black man.
Yet the Joe the Plumber incident also tells us something
about the messages being advanced by the Right, and
specifically, by the McCain/Palin campaign. In a fit of
desperation, the McCain/Palin campaign is suggesting that it
does not matter whether or not Joe the Plumber is a myth. In
fact, the McCain/Palin campaign has refused to acknowledge
that the story is just this side of a hoax. Rather, they
continue to reference this man as if his story is completely
credible. In doing this, they raise, once again, the
irrationalist side of their right-wing politics. In effect,
the McCain/Palin campaign is saying that facts are
irrelevant.
Wurzelbacher's aspirations speak to the dream of climbing the
ladder of success and upward mobility, a dream that has
proved to be a myth for many; a myth that has been preached
to all citizens and residents of the USA, but absorbed
largely by the white population. It is a myth that says if
you work hard, you advance; if you are dedicated to your job,
your living standard improves; and if you work hard and prove
your value to the company (and to society) the living
standard of your children will always be better than your
own.
So, the question that arises is simple but profound: what
happens when one finds out that this story line is true for
only small numbers of people? There seem to be 2-3 answers.
One can get angry and recognize that one has been hood-winked
by the system and, as a result, turn on the system, i.e.,
move to the Left. In the alternative, one can feel betrayed
and turn on those who one perceives to have been the source
of the betrayal. Or, one can engage in fantasy, and pretend
that one's current circumstances are only temporary, to soon
be replaced by something a lot better.
Wurzelbacher is currently fantasizing, but this fantasy can
easily morph into option #2, or the right-wing populism about
which I and others have been warning. In either case, options
#2 and #3 correspond to the message that sections of the
political Right wish to advance. They say, in essence, that
the only reason that you - the white worker or white small
business person - are not succeeding has little to do with
the system, but has to do with the 'other.' In the case of
the current economic crisis, the problem for McCain and the
Right is not the system, but a few greedy individuals. This
is the sort of message that Wurzelbacher wants to hear. The
message goes: there is nothing wrong with the system; there
is nothing that should really stop him from becoming the
person he wants to believe he can be; the only obstacles are
some greedy, shady individuals, and, quite possibly, the tax
plan of a Black man that allegedly might take money away from
him…money that he does not currently possess.
The myth that surrounds Joe the Plumber is a powerful one. It
is a myth that many people insist on believing despite a
great deal of evidence that it is largely a fraud. Although
whites have always had a relative advantage over people of
color, this has never meant that whites automatically succeed
or rise to the upper crust. Nevertheless, in challenging the
myth, one is calling into question a belief system that so
many people, particularly within white America, have grown to
accept.
Senator Obama has described the current economic crisis as
being far more than a crisis created by some individuals. He
has pointed to the results of thirty years of deregulation.
This is an important contrast with Senator McCain. Yet it is
not enough. Wurzelbacher/Joe the Plumber, and others like
him, deeply wish to believe the myth with which they have
grown up. The myth in its entirety must be shattered. That
can only happen by confronting the truth that the current
economic crisis and the thirty plus year decline in the
living standards of the average working person are not the
result of some 'other', e.g., Jews, Blacks, minorities,
immigrants, but, as I raised in my last commentary, are the
result of a very amoral economic system.
[BlackCommentator.com Executive Editor, Bill Fletcher, Jr., is the Executive Editor of BlackCommentator.com, a Senior Scholar with the Institute for Policy Studies, the immediate past president of TransAfrica Forum and co-author of the book, Solidarity Divided: The Crisis in Organized Labor and a New Path toward Social Justice (University of California Press), which examines the crisis of organized labor in the USA.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
