Showing posts with label teabag lynch mob. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teabag lynch mob. Show all posts

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Barbarians R Us


International solidarity campaigns have long been an activist staple. Citizens of countries who think themselves above barbarism appeal to the sensibilities of people who share their values and campaign against some ugly outrage on a foreign shore. While international solidarity campaigns have applied pressure to many just causes over the years, it's safe to say that most international solidarity campaign are of course the product of a web of complex ulterior motives usually rooted in geo-political reality. I remember the massive campaign of the 1970s and 1980s, "Save Soviet Jewry," which conveniently married the Zionist and anti-Communist agendas under a little righteously humanitarian umbrella. And as actually righteous as I believe the world campaign against South African Apartheid in that same period was, there's little doubt about the role the Cold War played in that struggle since the "West" largely supported South African racism and the pro-Communist world largely opposed it.

Which brings us to this fascinating postcard from the Soviet Union, vintage 1931. With its mailing instructions printed in eight Soviet languages, this postcard mobilizes international solidarity around the murderous reality in a particularly backward, barbarian corner of the world... the American South: "долой суд линча! да здравствуют негритянские рабочие!" "Down with Lynching! Long Live the Negro Workers!" The accompanying illustration shows a mob of root-tooting gun-waving, club-wielding, stetson-wearing, flag-waving yahoos stringing up a black man on a gallows.

It's funny how in retrospect that pre-war period is remembered as a succession of outrages about which international solidarity was mobilized: the Nazification of Germany and criminalization of the Jews, the Japanese attack on China, the Italian invasion of Ethiopia, the civil war in Spain. In 1931, it seems, the barbarians were right here at home.

Why do you think there was such massive African-American migration to northern cities in the first half of this century? Here's the answer: Because the American South was the Darfur of its day. On this day of the 2012 South Carolina primary where Republican dog-whistle racism is rising to audible levels (some would say "air-raid siren levels") it's worth remembering the not-so distant past even as it conflicts with our own carefully cultivated image as a liberal-minded bastion of civilization.

Related reading: Charles Blow today in the New York Times. Chauncey DeVega at We Are Respectable Negroes.

Click on the image of this postcard to see it larger.

Saturday, November 05, 2011

Graphic Democracy


Found on facebook. I love how much these graphics that spread like wildfire around teh internets communicate. Above, a suitably totalitarian "Message from the Ministry of Homeland Security." Below, "The Tea Party vs. #occupywallstreet."



And below, new meaning to the phrase "trickle-down theory." From Unrepentant Marxist.

Saturday, October 08, 2011

Hater Speaks at Hate Groups' Confab of Hate


There are plenty of other bloggers who enjoy watching every hateful, insane thing uttered by right-wing fundamentalist Christians and their various hate groups, and normally I'm not one for paying too much attention to every bit of hate speech they utter. It's nauseating and tediously repetitious. But here's a brief clip from Brian Fischer of the hate group American Family Association group making the concise point at today's Family Research Council-sponsored Value Voters Summit that the twin dangers of Islam and homosexuality are the worst things facing America today.

To my knowledge not a single Republican politician has explicitly distanced themselves from this single-minded focus on hatred as the unifying principle behind so-called "Values Voters" or social conservatives. It should be presumed that any politician who attended this conference with an aim other than denouncing it completely, including alleged moderate Mitt Romney whose religion has also been denounced by some of these same hate mongers, thinks it's okay to villify gays and Muslims in exchange for votes. What kind of country to they want to live in? Not the one I do. Shame on anyone who does not recognize this conference and every last social conservative it represents as being nothing but a modern-day Klan rally. Indeed while Mitt Romney has generalized about "poisonous language" from Fischer, he certainly didn't boycott the forum provided by people who share Fischer's views, and agrees with Fischer that gay Americans should be denied equal rights. All these groups with "Family" in their name prefer that gay people not be allowed to build loving families equal under the law. "Family" is their codeword for hatred of lesbians and gays.

Incidentally, the hate group FRC, organizers of today's summit, is run by Tony Perkins, who has given money to David Duke of the actual KKK as well as spoken to the white-racist Council of Conservative Citizens.

(Clip from Right Wing Watch via Gawker)

Saturday, September 17, 2011

Work Makes You Free!


Above each of their labor camps the German Nazis installed a sign that read "Arbeit Macht Frei," or "Work Makes You Free." The Nazis believed that certain people were good only for slave labor, and the concentration camps that were not designed as extermination camps were a source for super low-cost labor for German industry, where no regulations and no unions would interfere with eeking out every last drop of productive energy for corporate profit. As everyone knows, the Nazis believed that non "Aryans" like Jews and Roma (so-called Gypsies) were inferiors, parasites on the society of actual German citizenry. Of course "Work Makes You Free" was also a lie. There was no exit intended from the labor camps.

Which brings us to the clip below from right-wing Iowa Republican congressman Steve King below.



A few choice excerpts: "John Smith said, clear back then in the 1600s, No work, no eat. And that's part of the New Testament... We can't have a nation of slackers... and borrow money to pay the welfare of people who won't work."

What a horrifying and fascinating speech: utterly revealing about the mindset of the Republicans and their "tea party" fascists. He seems to be implying that the unemployment crisis is somehow voluntary, due to laziness. This is absolute dog whistle racist code speech. Which he even tries to justify with a Bible quote, for crissake. Who exactly is he talking about? This is standard white Republican code for the masses of blacks and hispanics who, with their insidious plots like ACORN, they imagine, actually caused the economic crisis.

You can see that he doesn't really believe that unemployment is a real problem, and that in some fundamental way he opposes social programs like unemployment compensation and foodstamps. This is what the Republicans mean when they talk about "job-killing regulations": they mean the regulation to pay a living wage and the regulation to care for the citizenry when the economy is in crisis. They believe that if all the "slackers" would get off their asses and work for less than minimum wage, the job crisis would be over.

Hmm. What did they have back in the 1600s that we don't have today? Perhaps there's a wise solution there? Serfdom? Indentured servitude? SLAVERY? Let's take America back...to 1650! The politics of Republicans like King may not be short steps from the institution of Nazi-style repression and labor camps, but it is indeed short steps away from the ideological justification for them.

Tip on Steve King thanks to Joe.My.God. "Arbeit Macht Frei" sign at Sachsenhausen concentration camp near Berlin, photo by me.

Thursday, September 01, 2011

About That Republican "No"


I've not been particularly inclined to defend Mr. Obama of late, but I am singularly horrified at the small thing that happened to him yesterday. President Obama has been promising for weeks to deliver a "bold" jobs plan in a speech after fake Labor Day. It will no doubt be insufficient, and will no doubt go over like a lead zeppelin in the Republican House. It will no doubt have many rousing platitudes about American workers and no doubt fail to combat the rampant union-busting so prevalent today or actually have much an effect on today's runaway unemployment. But never mind that. It turns out he wants to make a really big deal out of this speech and sent a note calling for a Joint Session of Congress before which he could deliver his address. The request for such a session is a ritual formality, always granted.

But this time Speaker of the House John Boehner said "no, ni**er know your place." Well he actually only said "no," but it's entirely obvious what he meant. Those of us listening for the dogwhistle can hear it very well, thank you, even when it is meant for certain other ears. Congressional historians reached by the NY Times say that such a thing has never happened before. The orange weeper Mr. Boehner made a lame excuse about (unspecified) votes scheduled for that very moment that could not, apparently, be postponed. Although nobody officially mentioned it, Wednesday is also apparently the time that the Republican 2012 Presidential clowncar will be holding one of its early debates at the "library" of their vile hero Reagan in California. Apparently the dishonest pontifications of a bunch of right-wing bigots is of more import than the federal jobs policy at a time of economic crisis.

Apparently the communications between Boehner and Obama were tense, and Boehner suggested the following day; initially Obama refused, and then, of course, he acquiesced to a Thursday appearance before Congress. Thursday is also the NFL kickoff, so fewer people will be wanting to watch national policy on teevee. The rightwing commentators went on the attack, accusing Obama of using his office to "campaign."

I find in this small episode an encapsulation of much of the tragedy of the Obama administration. In his eminently reasonable way Obama is busy talking about "bipartisan proposals," and the Republicans are saying "fuck you" and all but announcing their intention to disregard him entirely. And yet Obama brushes it off. And smiles, and scrambles to fashion some compromise that pulls some faint shadow of a hopeful political plan into a contrived and dangerously inadequate imitation plan that leaves the problem unsolved, him looking weak, and the right wing chortling all over themselves with unconstrained glee.

Maybe that's all that can be accomplished right now, who knows. But here's the thing. Appeasement doesn't work. Hitler invades Poland anyway; London gets bombed.

In the past three years it's been plain as day what the nature of much of the opposition to President Obama really is. The racist nature of the Republican party, both its conservative mainstream and extremist tea-bagger fringe, is clear to anybody who's not desperately trying to convince themselves otherwise. All that crap about the so-called Tea Party being mere economic conservatives, it's a lie. And the Republicans are treating our first African-American president as they have treated no president before, with palpable contempt and disregard.

President Obama was smart enough to know that he needed the energy of outraged progressives to get elected, along with all sorts of other constituencies. Who knows, he may even be smart enough to get himself reelected despite the shithole the economy is in, who knows. But it is painful to watch him transformed by Republican contempt into a Stepin-Fetchit caricature. Read the anti-Obama comments on any political website. There is some incisive criticism from the left here and there, and some programmatic disagreement from the right that is not based on lies and dishonesty. But most of it has turned into derisive objectification of his arrogance, cluelessness, spinelessness, or teleprompter habits. While I find myself disagreeing with his policies over and over again, it's painfully obvious that much of the criticism of Obama consists of sixteen-dollar-words covering up what is merely contempt for an uppity ni**er considered to be something only slightly more impressive than a trained monkey. In becoming a magnet for the disappointment of the American people, Obama is increasingly the catalyst for an explosion of white racist resentment. After the bumbling incoherence of President Bush, people are outraged about Obama's teleprompter? I don't buy it one bit.

And now, in advance, the Republican leader has said to Obama, "we don't really care what you have to say." They are not willing to offer even the ritual respect that is the glue that holds polite society together. As Chauncey DeVega on the brilliant "We Are Respectable Negroes" blog writes, Boehner just pulled a "boy you best get off the sidewalk and let a white man pass moment." And President Obama stepped down into the gutter and let Boehner pass. Will he call them out in his speech? It's nice to think about. I'll be very surprised if it happens.

We can do so much better. Pretending that what is happening is not actually happening will do us no good. America needs to have this confrontation: Obama's attempt to keep his hands clean seems to me aiming very very low. The Democratic and Republican parties need to be split asunder. Let the racists organize their party openly. Let the corporatists from both parties unite and try to take it all back. And let the vast majority of working people discover their own strength and power. Let the racism and the anti-gay bigotry and the thievery of the rich be openly condemned, and then let it be smashed.

Not papered over. Smashed.


Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Rick Perry, Man of Peace?


I'm quite horrified that Texas's secessionist-minded governor Rick Perry is now being presented as the powerhouse Republican who will end the clown-car chaos of the Republican presidential primaries and emerge as the candidate capable of unseating President Obama. He may call himself "Texas's Jobs Governor," but he's a rabid right-wing social conservative, a Taliban-style Christianist, and those Texas jobs are un-unionized, un-insured, minimum-waged burger flipping jobs. There's a great analysis of the politics of narcissistic white resentment behind fans of Perry and Bachmann over at Hullabaloo. Strongly recommended.

Perry seems to believe threatening to kill people is the way to build support for his campaign. First, he bizarrely threatened violence against "treasonous" (Republican appointee) Ben Bernanke for printing up money. Then, he suggested using predator drones along the American border to solve the immigration problem by tidily killing undocumented immigrants via remote control.

Sadly, Perry is not joking about any of this. As Texas governor he has presided over the executions of hundreds of condemned prisoners, included disabled individuals and people widely believed to have been convicted in error. Disgustingly, his support of the death penalty is seen by his supporters of evidence of his balls. And Perry is completely against government regulation of industry, which means you or your child's death from pollution-caused disease or poisoned food or faulty machinery? Not his problem.

(Photo of Rick Perry as a cadet in 1972 snagged from the excellent Rag Blog.)

Sunday, July 31, 2011

A Pathetic Little Distraction


This unremarkable e-mail arrived in one of my in-boxes today. It's from the official Obama reelection campaign committee, Obama for America. It doesn't ask for money, surprisingly, but it touts the President's plan to make cars more fuel efficient. It pissed me the hell off. A lot; and not because of what it said...I stopped reading it part way through and didn't even bother finishing it for this blog post.

It pissed me off because this weekend the administration and its Democratic allies seem to have been busy doing absolutely nothing more than preparing a massive appeasement of the tea party extremists over the fake debt ceiling issue, and this pathetic e-mail arrives in my box insulting the intelligence of people who once voted for Obama — yes, that includes me — with its lame attempt to distract its audience with table scraps when a massive betrayal of American social programs is in the offing. It is utterly cynical and shameless. And I'm pissed off at myself for falling into the trap of thinking in some small corner of my consciousness that maybe the movement of people that swept Obama to power would be enough to actually change anything at all when the right-ward trajectory of American politicians for decades is plain for all to see. This sad little e-mail is embarrassing not for what it says but for what it doesn't say, which is anything relevant at all to a watershed moment in American politics.

Take me off your mailing list please.

Thursday, July 28, 2011

On Congressional Debt Ceiling Negotiations


"The settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine (waves paper to the crowd - receiving loud cheers and "Hear Hears"). Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you ..." — Neville Chamberlain, British Prime Minister, on the Munich accord of 1938, announcing how in giving Hitler what he wanted (ie, Czechoslovakia), he had prevented war in Europe.

Thank God John Boehner, President Obama, and Harry Reid are negotiating with the Tea Party to prevent an economic catastrophe! What could go wrong?

Friday, June 17, 2011

Elephant in the Room: Michele Bachman Is a Pathological Liar and Delusionally Paranoid


That's a quote from 2005, but to my knowledge just-declared Republican presidential candidate and "Tea Party" favorite Michele Bachmann has not, er, refudiated it. Let's repeat it: "Literally, if we took away the minimum wage—if conceivably it was gone—we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level." Um. Sure! Imagine what we could do for unemployment if slavery was brought back!

Today at the Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, she said, according to the NY Times: “This hasn’t been talked about very much – the president’s plan for senior citizens is Obamacare,” Ms. Bachmann told party activists here. She added, “I think very likely what the president intends is that Medicare will go broke and ultimately that answer will be Obamacare for senior citizens.” What a combination of dishonesty, paranoia and idiocy. Obama wants to institute a government takeover of healthcare...by eliminating government medicare and forcing seniors to get private insurance! What she is saying is literally, actually, irrational....and worse, her fans eat it up. Isn't the truth actually that the Republicans, her people, want to eliminate government medicare and force them to buy private insurance? Disturbingly, the NY Times lets this bizarre fantasy go factually unchallenged.

Then there's her claims last year about the president's trip to India: "The president of the United States will be taking a trip over to India that is expected to cost the taxpayers $200 million a day," Bachmann said. "He's taking 2,000 people with him. He will be renting out over 870 rooms in India. And these are five-star hotel rooms at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel. This is the kind of over-the-top spending." This was a lie created out of whole cloth based on somebody's misreading of single misinformed article in an Indian newspaper.

Reactionary idiocy on the Middle East: "Today President Barack Obama has again indicated that his policy towards Israel is to blame Israel first. In a shocking display of betrayal towards our ally, President Obama is now calling on Israel to give up yet more land and return to its 1967 borders. If there is anything that has been proven, the policy of land-for-peace has meant that Israel has continually had to give away increasing amounts of its land and decrease its size. In exchange, it still has not known security. President Obama wants to further this policy by putting Israel in a very vulnerable position with borders that would be extremely difficult to defend....I am calling on President Obama to reverse course and clearly renounce the position which he spelled out today. This is an insult to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the day before the Prime Minister is scheduled to come to the United States." Yes, in print she's taking the side of a foreign leader against her president. She's a patriotic American!

Idiocy on Obama being a "socialist" and on mariage equality: "“This is just the beginning in our fight to repeal Barack Obama in 2012,” she wrote. “Had Barack Obama been on the ballot in 2010, he would have gone down in a fiery defeat. Yet he continues to push his far-left, socialist agenda on the American people. And today, he has declared war on marriage.” Obama far left? Perhaps if your politics are somewhat to the right of Attila the Hun.

She's a foreign policy expert! "Bachmann said there was a name already chosen for that part of the region, but she couldn't recall it exactly. Bachmann said Iran would use that territory as a training ground for terrorists. "There is already agreement made," said Bachmann. "They are going to get half of Iraq, and that is going to be a terrorist safe haven zone where they can go ahead and bring about more attacks in the Middle East, and come against the United States." She couldn't recall it exactly, I bet!

And she pays attention to detail! "Nearly four decades ago, a group of settlers seeking religious freedoms, known as the Pilgrims, marked their thankfulness to God for countless blessings with a Thanksgiving celebration." Yes, she wrote decades.

Wikipedia's description of delusional disorder nails her: "Delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis denoting a psychotic mental disorder that is characterized by holding one or more non-bizarre delusions[1] in the absence of any other significant psychopathology. Non-bizarre delusions are fixed beliefs that are certainly and definitely false, but that could possibly be plausible, for example, someone who thinks he or she is under police surveillance."

From the police report of what was called "Bathroomgate" back in 2005, when Bachmann claimed she was kidnapped by lesbians: "BACHMAN [sic] STATED THAT WHEN SHE WAS GETTING READY TO LEAVE SHE WENT TO THE RESTROOM. SENATOR BACHMAN STATED THAT WHEN SHE WAS TRYING TO LEAVE THE RESTROOM, 2 WOMEN BLOCKED IN AND TOLD HER THEY WANTED TO CONTINUE TALKING. SEN BACHMAN STATED SHE WAS AFRAID AND SCREAMED FOR HELP. THE 2 WOMEN LET HER LEAVE THE RESTROOM WHEN SHE SCREAMED. THE WOMEN ARE BELIEVED TO BE W/ THE GLBT GROUP."

You know, all of this would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact that millions of white people in America are so driven by racist rage that they're actually going to pretend they believe what she says and vote for her.

Graphic snagged from JMG. These are dated but do read the "Best Michele Bachmann Quotes" at the Dump Bachmann Blog. Unbelievably, of course, she has been reelected several times since making many of these bizarre statements.

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

"Birtherism" Equals Racism


The above photo, of course, with the caption "Now You Know Why No Birth Certificate," is from the scandalously racist email that got a local leading California Republican in a bit of hot water this month. Anyone familiar with American racism can recognize this, like the many racist graphic "jokes" that circulated during the 2008 election, and see it for what it is. It came as part of a resurgence in the so-called birther movement, revitalized by buffoon Donald Trump (who President Obama called, today, obliquely, a "carnival barker").

Because oddly, today the White House released the so-called long form birth certificate that the birther racists claimed was being suppressed. President Obama called the affair "silliness" and a "distraction." Immediately buffoon Trump and professional quitter Sarah Palin tried to take credit for some kind of triumph, while conspiracy-minded teabaggers went deeper into their illogical, factually-challenged attempt to delegitimize the president guilty of being born black and bearing a full complement of Arabic names. Now Trump is questioning Obama's educational credentials, suggesting he's just a beneficiary of affirmative action.

To my knowledge no President has had his citizenship questioned before. And indeed there is no evidence that President Obama is anything other than who he says he is. There is not now, and never has been, any controversy over these issues. Before today's release there has been ample evidence — birth documents, eyewitness testimony, newspaper birth notices — that back up the facts of Obama's birth. There is no controversy over whether a person born in the United States, regardless of the marital or immigration or citizenship status of his parents, is other than a natural citizen. Any doubts over these questions are sheer inventions and fabrications in the fevered racist imaginations of the teabaggers and their enablers. There is no controversy among anyone with a regard for facts. Every last one of the birther assertions is manufactured out of the whole cloth of dishonesty, lies and racism, carefully pitched to the dogwhistle frequency of modern racist discourse in which few actually use the "n" word but everybody (except apparently the media) knows exactly what is being implied.

The question remains who is playing this game more successfully. Our friends at the excellent "We Are Respectable Negroes" blog wrote today that Obama has just surrendered to the birther movement by attempting to appease their irrational hatreds. In his statement today Obama failed to call out the racism that is so self evident in the birther fantasy. He made instead his typical appeal for bipartisan unity, which is certainly classic Obama.

Today's document will not silence the teabagger lynch mob, because they don't actually care whether Obama can back up his identity or not. That's all a smokescreen to cover their real racist agenda, and that agenda, fast becoming the currency of the Republican Party itself, is a mortal threat to a democratic and secular society.

Monday, April 18, 2011

2, El Diablito


In some syncretic religions of Latin America, worshippers use little red-horned plaster statues of the devil to represent aspects of Exu, or the trickster spirit who inhabits the crossroads. The crossroads is both literal and figurative, where things could go either way, up or down, left or right, good or bad, and a deserted intersection is as good a place as any for an impromptu little shrine. In these religions -- like Macumba in Brazil, cousin though not sister to North American Lucumi/Santeria -- these little devils often look like comic-book illustrations of "The" Devil we're accustomed to in American fairytale horror stories for gullible semi-religious people not well versed in actual theology. This Exu is an aspect of the Yoruba Eleggua or Elegba, but a wild and earthy one caught mixing it up with the ancestral spirits. One aspect of Exu is Pomba Gira, a female gypsy-spirit consorting with the dead: I have a little statue of her where she is represented as a beautiful dark-coffee-colored naked woman cavorting on a lavender coffin. But these little red devils are not in any way equivalent to the great symbolic evil of the Abrahamic Satan; they're not the Manichean darkness duking it out with God's lightness, and they're not a nihilistic force of revenge summoned up by anti-social teenagers or mentally-impaired would-be mass murderers.

Instead they're a recognition of mortality and the human condition, including knowing that we don't always do the right thing, especially when we're trying to get where we want to go. Above all Exu is neither evil nor morbid, though the intended playfulness of laughing at death is often colored by the worldly knowledge that death is indeed everyone's eventual visitor. Temptation, sure: people who play with Exu are definitely playing with fire. Do the right thing? Well who's to say exactly what that is anyway: is God really a micro-manager? We make plans but things don't always (usually?) go as we hope they will. Enter the little devils.

Which brings me to what I'd actually like to contemplate, which is what I'm going to call the lesser evil of lesser evilism in American politics, our very own political little devil.

When I was a child in Chicago in the 1960s, I remember a senatorial election in which my very political parents announced they were supporting Charles Percy, a liberal (inconceivable now) Republican. I remember telling all my little friends at school that I was a Republican! At age eight I wasn't yet hip to the complexities of Chicago politics and given the progressive liberal atmosphere I grew up in, this seemed sort of logical given the dark and looming machine of the first mayor Dailey who was anything but progressive. Of course two years later as my parents dove into working for a succession of anti-war Democratic Party presidential candidates in 1968 I remember eating a bit of crow as I went around telling my little friends that I was now a Democrat. Well, we know how that ended.

Fast forward to the heady days of my young adulthood. At college I became a communist and soon learned the lessons of Leninism: the Republicans and the Democrats are the twin pillars of American capitalism, tweedle-dum to tweedle-dee. Any difference between the two was surely cosmetic, and the elaborate dancing exchange between the two a well-rehearsed trick to keep the working people from exercising their own independent class power. There might be publicity value in fielding a leftwing third party candidate, but the slogan of the hour was, "Don't Vote, They're All the Same!" And dutifully, that is what I did. And, speaking of evils that aren't so lesser, in 1980 Ronald Reagan was elected president.

The left was minuscule in 1980; its influence was nil. It wasn't their fault. But I soon learned that, in fact, "they" weren't all the same. Ronald Reagan turned out be a very bad man, and he did some very bad things, including laughing and whistling while quite a few of my friends contracted the mysterious and then always-fatal AIDS. Say what you will about the cannibalistic unsustainability inherent in capitalism, Reagan and his inane trickle-down economic theories are one of the reasons the American economy is in shithole today. And while it's simplistic to ascribe the death of the left only to Ronald Reagan, nevertheless it was during his presidency that the organized Marxist left, whether or not it was overtly sympathetic to the Soviet Union or not, followed the Soviet Union into the dustbin of history. Left parties that had thousands of members soon had dozens of members; left sectlets that had hundreds of members soon had none.

Anyway by the time 1988 came around I was no longer convinced that voting in presidential elections was irrelevant. Like many leftists I worked on the Jesse Jackson campaign, which it must be said, was inside the Democratic Party. Of course he lost. I set aside organized political activism shortly thereafter.

There is a very intelligent Maoist website called Kasama. Once upon a time that would have been quite a nonsequitur, but now two decades on from the fall of the Soviet Union and well into the revolutionary egalitarian democracy of the internet, all sorts of leftists are leaving the worst of their dogmatic trappings behind and trying to regain their footing. Kasama has initiated a discussion of the upcoming elections based on the lessons of Obama. I contemplated participating in this discussion as it's one of the handful of leftist sites I read daily. But I was immediately confronted by the reality of my position: I voted for Obama, and so far, I plan to vote for him again. Because the main point of many leftists, Kasama included, remains: don't vote, they're all the same. Kasama and other leftists I've read say that the Democrats are whipping up fear of the teabaggers to scare people into supporting Democrats. My response is, yes, I'm scared!

The great American socialist Eugene Debs had an opinion on lesser evilism: "It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it." A beautiful quote but I'm not sure that in our current era it's true. Elections have results; one side always wins. It would be great if there was a viable electoral alternative to the Democratic Party. It would be great if the great majority of working people organized themselves in their own class interest and rejected the Democrats who are always selling them (us!) out. But there is not... yet. Leftists, and I do count myself on that side, should advocate for independence and try to raise consciousness and condemn the actions of both Republicans and Democrats that need condemning. But at the same time we do this, I believe it is necessary to recognize the reality of the balance of forces in society and vote for viable candidates, which usually means Democrats. In 2000 many many leftists got behind the independent candidacy of Ralph Nader (with, I would argue, many many right-wing independent voters since "independent" voting in the United States is in recent history almost always right-wing populism). The result? A close election went to George Bush, the right-wing Republican. We can see from the 2000, 2008 and 2010 elections how it is not irrelevant who wins an election.

President Obama and the Democrats have done some terrible terrible things. They have continued old wars and started new ones. They have continued to steal from working people and rewarded the rich and the corporations. They have continued to erode civil liberties. They will inadequately defend the social safety net that is being whittled away. All these things are true: each one of these things makes me furious... including being furious at myself for believing that Obama's sometimes brilliant lofty speeches meant anything at all. But if you're frustrated by President Obama, imagine President Palin or President Trump or President Bachmann or even President Pawlenty or President Christie, and be very, very afraid. That's not fear-mongering, that is the real choice before us.

I am utterly unconvinced by today's left discounting the danger from the right wing. I don't know if it's because as a gay man I'm sensitive to things that many straight white people don't see or what, but I think the left's failure to identify the teabagger movement as nascent fascism is a crucial mistake. The mainstream media like the New York Times have been busy perpetuating this absolute myth, no make that lie, that the so-called Tea Party is all about economic issues and not about the social conservatism that has been festering on the right wing for decades. Perhaps it's because the leaders of the "Tea Party" are so careful to stick to their coded dogwhistle approach, it's hard to pin them down. But anyone who cares to look can see that this new right-wing is deeply and profoundly racist and antigay; its mixture of populism and corporatism is missing only the brown shirts or white sheets. History does not repeat itself exactly: the fact that the teabaggers have not mobilized actual lynch mobs is I think irrelevant, given the right-wing infiltration of the military and militia movement. The Democrats and elections will not, I don't think, be able to defeat this new rightwing threat, but I believe for now, until the left finds a way to make itself relevant again, Democratic victories may stave off the worst of it.

Obama and the Democrats are going to do what they're going to do. I'm not so naive as to believe that "we" can do something like "hold their feet to the fire." This is the president of U.S. Imperialism we're talking about: it's in his job description, his very nature, to do terrible terrible things. But at local levels especially, leftists should be weighing the possibility of finding viable, not symbolic, candidates who can begin to change the game.

That game will change only when the Democratic and Republican parties explode and factionalize. While the people -- the working class if you will -- have tremendous power and social weight, they don't know it. And that's the task of leftists I think, not to build better sectlets and tiny little parties like they tried -- and failed at -- before. But to focus on raising the self-awareness of the people who should be fighting back against the class war of the rich people. I'm not sure I call myself a Marxist anymore, that's true. But in today's world I'm just not sure what the hell that means anymore. The Marxist left has always said that the revolution will not come from the ballot box. Okay then: I'm not seeing any revolution from outside the ballot box on its way, at least in this country. But that election's happening whether any of us like it or not. While we're building the idea of the world that could be, let's commit a little lesser evil and participate in the world that is.

Better the little devil you know?

UPDATE: I feel compelled, almost four years later, to say I'm extremely glad that I changed my mind from this piece, and in the 2012 elections decided to no longer vote for Democrats. Indeed, I question the process of voting in the United States as being singularly delusional and worthless. It strikes me now that Democrats, far from being a lesser evil, are the more effective evil, siphoning off social movements and sending them off to die. The kind of cynical realism I mused with at this stage of my life was thankfully and forcefully unravelled by participation in the Occupy movement. #LessVotingMoreRevolution


(This is part of a continuing series of meditations on the archetypal Mexican Loteria bingo cards. For earlier essays in the series click here.)

Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Belief Without Doubt?


"Stones from the River" is the story of a young German woman growing up before, and living through, the Second World War. Written by German-American author Ursula Hegi, it's not a new book: a copy has been floating around my office and it was my turn to read it. It was published in the early 1990s and at some point achieved the dubious award of being an Oprah book club selection. Anyway the perspective of the book's heroine, Trudi Montag, is quite unique. She's an outsider in her community since she was born a "little person," or dwarf. It's a satisfying story with, of course, more than its share of tragedy given the setting. Trudi isn't an international spy or resistance hero, she's just a person trying to live her life, though her personal morality helps her to make important decisions to reject the national chauvinism and anti-Semitism rising with the Nazification of the world around her.

Anyway one passage caused me to fold up the corner of the page it resonated so clearly. It's about the time she hears Hitler give a speech shortly after he took over the government. At the risk of invoking the dread Godwin's Law, I thought this little bit of fiction shined a spotlight on a phenomenon I worry about in our own trying times. Which isn't to say any of the current wave of political demagogues out there are quite so genocidally single-minded or precipitously bound for dictatorship as was Hitler. History doesn't repeat itself exactly, but it makes one grateful that the current crop of hateful idiots out there in the public square seem to lack the charisma necessary to truly rise above the mobs in which they are ensconsed.

Here's the excerpt:

"He was not nearly as tall as she'd expected from newspaper photos, and he look straight at her when he talked, not excluding her like the assistant pastor, Freidrich Beier, who spoke above her head as if she were too insignificant to be included.... Herr Hitler's mouth moved independently of his eyes. There was something wrong with his face: the features didn't work together. But he looked directly at her — at everyone in the swollen crowd — like a magician performing some amazing trick of singling out everyone at once, and it was that gaze — filled with an immeasurable greed — that held all of them while his high-pitched voice spun silken ropes around them.

She fought the excitement of his gaze and voice because what he wanted from her was only too familiar — belief without doubts — something she'd resisted since first grade.

She fought him by reminding herself what her father had said to Emil Hesping — that they lived in a country where believing had taken the place of knowing..... Trudi had a sudden image of him, alone in his bedroom.... The greed she'd felt in him, the greed which had sucked all those people into his influence, was still in the room with him, and she was seized by a deep fear for the world."
[emphasis added by me]

Isn't that it exactly? "Belief without doubts" and "a country where believing has taken the place of knowing" seem to sum up exactly what I find so terrifying about the right-wing in America. There is no factual discussion to be had; no argument that can be won on its own merits. In line with yesterday's musings on lies and liars, today's demagogues are free to say whatever they want because people are greedy for easy solutions, for easy answers, and they know that there is an audience out there who will not question or doubt what they say. Trying times indeed.

Image is a 1933 German propaganda postcard from the online German Propaganda Archive.

Monday, April 04, 2011

Lies! All Lies!


I was reading an article in the Times this weekend about Rep. Michelle Bachmann, presumed far right Republican presidential candidate. It treated her seriously, which I find remarkable in and of itself. Also remarkable were the comments on the Times' website, where outraged conservatives called her "highly intelligent" and accomplished. I think these are remarkable because to me, setting aside for the moment the quite real possibility that she is clinically mentally ill, I'm not sure I have ever read a statement coming from Rep. Bachmann that wasn't if not a complete and total lie, at least in large part full of dishonest intent and insinuation. What kind of person would vote for a liar like her?

Or consider Donald Trump, a wealthy buffoon who seems to be also toying with a run for President on the Republican ticket. While most serious prognosticators say that is unlikely, he's certainly all over the internet trying to make a name for himself as the last of the "Birthers," that is, promoters of the thinly-disguised racist lie that President Obama is somehow not actually an American citizen. Nobody seems to believe that Trump actually believes what he is saying, which is a reasonable argument because Trump's line of argument seems to have emerged untainted by actual facts like a giant turd directly from his ass. But nevertheless the man is making at least internet headlines just by spinning yarns. What kind of person finds a liar like him even slightly amusing?

President Obama announced his reelection campaign today, which gave me pause to remember all the hopes most of us placed on him after eight years of listening to Bush bumble (and lie) his way through a presidency that seems to have been nothing but a huge disaster for the United States and the world. Obama has of course fine-tuned the art of lying... or at least misleading and deflecting. I'll save for a rainy day my overall analysis of his presidency -- it isn't all bad news, considering -- but I'm saddened to announce that he is safely ensconced back in the ranks of lesser-evil Democrats. For me the last straw has been the utter atrociousness of his Middle Eastern policy and the facility with which he has wandered into a new war. But let's set aside any specific criticism or damning praise and say that we all know Obama is a lying politician -- just like the rest of them.

I googled "bible verses on lying" and got back a list of well over a hundred references, split between the Old and New Testaments, which means that most people raised with even a casual awareness of the Abrahamic faiths which so influence world culture are exposed to the idea that lying is a bad thing. And yet I would imagine that most people in most countries, our own certainly included, believe that their governments routinely, if not habitually, lie to us. Indeed some governments probably lie almost exclusively.

So my question -- and this time around I have no answer -- is how did this come to be? How do we, the lied-to, come to be so accepting of what we know are lies? I try very hard not to lie in my personal life. Little white lies torment me. The seductively manipulative power of lying is always offset by guilt and self disgust. I suppose lies of omission come easier, but it all seems so stressful and complicated. Who wants that?

Lying is of course a valued professional skill. In fact we have an entire industry -- it's called "marketing" -- which specializes in prettified lying. We beg to have our aspirations manipulated, which I suppose contextualizes at least American politics. But since I think politics is more important than breakfast cereal or new cars or poisonous medicines, I think it's fair to ask, why do we put up with this? What would happen if we didn't? And isn't it interesting that in politics, by my definition anyway, the "good guys" are the ones who can embrace the cynicism of knowing better and the "bad guys" are the ones who pretend that nothing's wrong?

What a mess! Welcome to Pinocchio culture! What kind of people are we?

Friday, March 04, 2011

Tea Party Rally turns into Fascist Hate Fest


This horrifying clip has been making the rounds of virtually all the blogs I read. I can't let it go by without sharing it here as well. The video is from the Greater Los Angeles Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and it documents a California rally "organized by anti-Muslim bigots to protest a February fundraising event held by an American Muslim relief group for relief work and charity in the U.S." The video excerpts speeches by local elected politicians, as well as the crowd heckling attendees to the benefit. Attendees who include lots of women and children. Among the organizers of the hate rally were local teabagger, uh "Tea Party," groups, no doubt focusing only on issues of economy and small government (snark!). In it one can see elected officials proudly fantasizing about murdering some of their constituents.

This is some of the ugliest video I've seen. And unlike the numerous videos of stupid people and/or rightwing people and/or racist people and/or some combination of the above that have been making the rounds over the past two or three years, this doesn't show teabaggers wandering about in a teabagger environment. This shows the unbridled racist anger and hatred of teabaggers when they get a chance to actually interact with the objects of their disaffection. It's viscerally disturbing.

To those who say the Teabaggers are not a fascist movement, I present this as evidence. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Tahrir Square... Wisconsin


This inspiring footage is from a protest in Wisconsin's state capital of Madison, where the efforts of a new teabagger governor and Republican legislature to quite literally roll back all the gains of the labor movement have met amazing and inspiring resistance. The teabaggers are showing their true nature again and again. Their fake campaign against "big government" is just a coverup for social conservatism and old-fashioned anti-working class pro-big business policies. It's hard not to notice the similarities to Egypt. And Tunisia. And now Bahrain and Yemen and Libya. Is the class struggle returning?

Some great details and analysis over at Lenin's Tomb.

Monday, January 17, 2011

MLK Day 2011: The Fight Against Racism Remains


When I was a member of the organized left many years ago, it was not unusual to hear The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. derided as being a sell-out reformist compared to his militant competitors in the African-American community like Malcolm X. It is true that these two men had differing analyses of American society, and differing responses suggesting counterposed strategies for fighting the racism so prevalent--some would argue so foundational--in American life. Both these great men have been gone for so long, and the world has turned so far, it strikes me as less productive to focus on their differences.

Indeed looking deeper at Dr. King's speeches and actions in the 1960s shows him to be far more radical than the co-opting establishment myths about him would like people to believe. As I noted a few days ago, his position on war and the American military puts him far, far to the left of any mainstream American political figure today. Certainly far, far to the left of our first African-American president. While it might not be possible (or necessary) to resolve Malcolm X's derisive dismissal of the American baby and its bathwater of racism with Dr. King's lofty appeals to some innately American promise of justice, so many years later these things seem like splitting hairs.

What's clear to me is that despite that first African American president, despite undeniable civil rights victories with many legal, social and cultural ramifications, racism remains far from dormant as an animating force for the American right wing.

It's sort of a miracle that Martin Luther King Day is actually a Federal Holiday. I remember when it became one back in the 1980s, it was a joyous moment. No one should forget that chief among the opponents of making Dr. King's birthday a holiday was the right-wing saint Ronald Reagan. For this post I wanted to research who else opposed the holiday -- of course the racist Senator Jesse Helms led the opposition -- and so this morning I googled "who opposed King holiday." I found an innocent sounding website that deeply disturbed me. It's called martinlutherking.org. Click that link at your own risk. Because masquerading as an information resource about Dr. King, this site is actually a nest of racist vipers operated by Neo-Nazi and KKK sympathizers. It links to works by notorious racist David Duke, and links to an alleged "MLK Discussion Forum" hosted by Stormfront, a fascist hate group. It focuses on Dr. King's ties to "communists and Jews," and has articles on why the King holiday should be repealed: it even has downloadable "informational" flyers for your kids to pass out at school "exposing" the truth about Dr. King. These are the snakes lurking deep in the American underbrush. Perhaps not so deep.



Talk of civility in American politics is lovely. People should treat other people with respect. That is an undeniable aspiration, with almost spiritual resonance.

But here's the problem. Pronounced in racist epithets, bad cracker humor like the tea party sign above, or in pretentious pseudo-intelligent polite speech a la Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck or any Republican congressperson, the underlying message coming from the right wing is in and of itself abhorrent. When Ronald Reagan and his ilk opposed the King holiday, they weren't rudely tossing around the "n" word. When today's teabagger movement implies that black and brown people are to blame for the economic crisis, they're not openly calling for lynchmobs.

I think challenging the right-wing's message is absolutely crucial. Exposing the ugliness underneath some newfound professed civility will now become more important than ever. The website I found today is perfectly civil, for example. I didn't see the "n" word anywhere at all. But the racism seeping out of every ugly word is undeniable. Are we to pretend that it's all okay because it's "civil"? I don't think so. While the disinformation website I stumbled on might be a step or two to the right of the average teabagger or Republican congressman, it's clearly calibrated to be in their same ballpark. And this is the danger: do we on the left start pulling punches in response to the right wing's implicit racism because of how it might look? I don't think so.

Dr. King and Malcolm X both had the courage to tell the truth about what they believed. And as the beliefs of both men evolved, they had the courage to explain what was happening to their thinking: Dr. King's position on the Vietnam War and Malcolm X's position on separatism both changed dramatically as a result of them broadening their experiences and drawing connections and conclusions. The words of these two brilliant men remain with us revealing condemnations of racism and injustice that remain extraordinarily relevant and inspiring. The anger bubbling under the surface of their words is white-hot, clear now decades later. And justified.

So while what's called the incivility of the right wing may be grotesque, it seems to me what is more grotesque is the message underlying that incivility. It's that message that needs to be called out and exposed. Allowing the teaparty to claim it is interested only in "constitutional and economic issues" might seem civil. But it's also a lie. The ugly racism at the core of the right wing's message is plain to see. And despite the martyrdom of Dr. King, despite his canonization in a Federal Holiday (and I'm glad for the day off!), there's so much work to be done to fulfill his vision.

Saturday, January 08, 2011

Sarah Palin Gets One on Her Wishlist


A moderate "blue dog" Democratic congresswoman from Arizona (where the badge "moderate" makes her a flaming radical) has been shot and gravely wounded. Gabrielle Giffords was one of the Democratic officeholders on Sarah Palin's "sarahpac" campaign poster with crosshairs denoting the members who needed to be, um, eliminated. The shooter, who killed several other people in his attack on a public event at which Giffords was to speak, is one Jared Loughner. He has not been tied (yet?) to any political group. Tellingly, apparently the above graphic has now been scrubbed from the Sarahpac website.

Arizona is one of the most right-wing states in the country, with local government and law enforcement firmly in the hands of racist vigilantes trying to figure out how to preserve white privilege and superiority from Hiapanic immigrants. Lately they have even been trying to figure out how to deny citizenship to children of Hispanic immigrants born on U.S. soil. So I'm not surprised a political assassination would take place there. Whether the shooter is a right-winger or just a lone lunatic, it's clearly a place where both groups would feel empowered to turn Palin's crazytalk rhetoric into reality.

(Thanks to Joe.My.God. for being one of the internet sources not letting Palin and the teabaggers get away with removing from memory this poster virtually calling for the assassination of Giffords.)

Update: There's an absolutely chlling clip of Giffords herself discussing Palin's threatening poster with its gunsight crosshairs over at MSNBC. "We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but, the thing is, that the way that she has it depicted, has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district. When people do that, they've got to realize there's consequences to that action."

Thursday, January 06, 2011

Teabaggers Take Control of Congress


Republican John Boehner, shown above, was sworn in yesterday as the Speaker of the House of Representatives, displacing Democratic congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Getting Ready for Thanksgiving?


To get you in the Thanksgiving mood, here's an oldie but goodie. Two years ago, after she lost the vice presidential election but before she quit the governorship, Sarah Palin was interviewed at a turkey farm while turkeys are seen being slaughtered in the background. And no, turkey farm is not a euphemism for the Palin house. Mercifully, if inexplicably, somebody has added a KC & The Sunshine Band track to this video which blunts the horrible gobbling of the doomed turkeys, I mean, of Quitter Palin. I don't blame you if you turn the sound down. Though you'll miss the discussion of "government programs on the chopping block" just as a turkey is stuffed down the head-chopping chute.

Watch this and then go read Frank Rich's NYT OpEd piece where he pretty much says she could be our next President. Happy thanksgiving!