Maybe we'd be a lot better off if we agreed on a dictatorship. Freeze the borders, bomb anywhere in the world if they don't give us their raw materials, lock up the colored peoples in camps, and eat big meals. We can then wash it down with alcohol and really not give a shit. Oh, and only wasps can be on TV commercials and the women can argue over how clean they keep their linoleum floors. Yes, those were the days! And if I stop in a store, English is always spoken exclusively. An all white world! No more of that 3rd world riff-raff. Bring it on!!
The problem, as I see it, is that we can't even debate rationally whether we'd be better off with a dictator because they are total liars and won't admit the obvious. They have a vested interest in pretending that they love democracy...that they're patriotic. No, it has gotten to the point where, if almost any subject is even brought up to them, the right wing quickly reveals itself as being little more than a poorly concealed reservoir of bigotry. For example, let's face it, they favor vouchers rather than pay to improve public education, because they want to "legally" send their children to all white schools. And, even more to the point than that, at all costs don't share the wealth. No problem that for the last 30 years we've witnessed unprecedented growth in income disparity, the rich can never get enough. I could go on and on with examples of their blatant class bigotry but, what's the point? I trust you understand. "Vouchers" is a mere slogan, used by the real elite, like "patriotism", to solicit the prejudice that is just below the surface of every human being.....and they know it.
You want to experience receiving a blank look? Try explaining to any one of these slobs that Obama just wants to let expire the Bush tax cut for the rich, his proposal doesn't even come remotely close to what the rich were paying under Eisenhower, Nixon, or Bush Sr. Naturally, they are left speechless because their position is indefensible. They apparently think they have an absolute right to any wealth they have acquired. They will not give up anything without screaming as loudly as they can........Unfortunately, be ready for more and even louder noise.
And yet, for example, according to the right wing, when welfare was "reformed" over a decade ago, that was reduction of a mere privilege, not a "right". The poor don't have a right to much more than the air, according to the elites,.....they should just be thankful that they live in this country, and be appreciative and obedient, and wave the flag. After all, everything's fine the way it is, no need for this call for "change". Who needs change when you can eat whatever you want, whenever you want it, and wherever you wish? To them (the real elite), the only possible "change" is that they should acquire even more wealth because they "deserve" it. (How has the overwhelming majority agreed to this crap for so long?).
We have to finally fully admit the truth that it is human nature to always want more. It will never end, so stop waiting for it. The elites understand human nature and use bigotry to their advantage. We (the human race) have to be in a constant struggle to battle our own tendencies, to fight to promote equality. It's true that there will be no such thing as "equality" unless we are engaged in constant struggle to achieve and then maintain it.
Presumably we know that people are not born equal, we can only hope and aspire to equality of opportunity. But, it must be kept in mind that at any given time there is only so much "pie" to go around. Therefore, it's also human nature for these Sarah Palin fans, to do what they can to prevent the underclasses from "succeeding". For every little bit of monetary "success" by those without, the elite must surrender something of value. They'll never do it voluntarily, and never without loud screaming. Vouchers, low taxes, wars, patriotism, abortion, etc., are all bigotry-based slogans used to keep those without in line, all to the benefit of the real elite. Certainly, it's time to ignore those distractions and treat them as just that: "distractions", thrown in the way by the elite to try to prevent the masses from focusing on what must truly matter to them: distinctions of wealth.
And, it would seem to necessarily follow, that although we would achieve much in the way of needed efficiency, if we were to move to a dictatorship, there would be the likely prospect that Mr./Ms. dictator would protect the wealth of the real elite. and bigotry would be even more expanded and out in the open than it now is. And, almost by definition, the masses would lose whatever access they now have to appeal (question) the decisions that are made, so the overwhelming majority of humans in this country would be worse off. That being the case, dictatorship must be prevented.
It is no surprising announcement to say that we (the USA) now face an enormously large problem. There is a good chance that in attempting to resolve this problem, we will end up in an ultra-rightist, dictatorship, with even more inequality than is now present. In looking into the foggy future, I can't help but see a USA that is very good for the dwindling few and ever worse for the growing majority. Until what? (because things always do change). It continues to "grow" until it just bursts and I don't want to be around for the explosion. But is it even fair of me to leave such an existence to my children? Probably not.
Accordingly, we cannot morph into a dictatorship. Instead, we must continue with some sort of lame attempt at democracy until we get it right or, at least, acceptable. And due to a great many reasons, including how well the right is organized and how loud will be the screaming, we have no choice but to mobilize now, and urgently. This should be the existing short-term plan, anyhow. As to the long-term, and disputes of capitalism v. socialism, etc., we at least have several months within which to argue and decide.
I see this as akin to a life and death struggle: run, work harder, and harder, and "beat" the outnumbered into submission. There is no choice.
Obama, whatever you may think of him, represents our best hope. If he fails we get at least 4 or 8 more years of idiots and scoundrels, at a time when not only is it highly undesirable but, humanity can simply not afford it. So, we have no choice but to support him in mass. I think he has requested such support. Push him! We have no choice but to help and now! It may actually surprise us as to how much we can achieve. After all, there really must be some hope.
]]>In the course of my life I have learned to be very careful when I'm drawn to use that terminology---after all, I have lived through the fall of the Soviet Union, and even the election of Reagan himself, among other remarkable and shocking developments.
However, I can't escape the conclusion that we currently face the most severe and numerous set of crises ever. There is a real chance the human race, as we know it, won't survive until 2100. Is that a probability, maybe, most likely, but certainly, a real possibility.
We, the United States, the most powerful nation on earth, started the first eight years of this deciding century, with an unbelievable dumb ass as our leader. Who would have predicted that he'd be as ineffective and harmful as he was? Very few. But, we've just about run out of room for surprises----our chances for survival increase substantially with predictability.
Thus, in an effort to both predict and control the future let me offer the following: if Obama (liberalism) should fail in this country then there will probably be a return to power of the hard-core conservatives. And we have no time at all for 4 or 8 more years of garbage.
I am fully aware that earnest political differences are as old as the ages but, just when we can't tolerate it, and can't afford it, we are faced with what I will call the "absurdists". I won't dwell on it here, but what exactly is Sarah Palin? I follow current events and political developments quite closely and the truth is that I didn't see a scintilla of evidence that she knows anything. And yet she is being hailed by many as the future of the Republican Party. She is popular. Other possible "leaders" of the right include Huckebee of Arkansas (certainly a potential member of the American Taliban, if we had one, or maybe we do), Romney (who will clearly say anything at anytime and comb his hair, to try to get elected), and Jindal (somone who would rather watch his fellow Louisiana citizens suffer with no income than to risk his own personal political outlook): a real "leader" at a time that the situation mandates just that. Can you imagine if McCain had won? What would that old, stupid man be doing now? Continuing the exercise of fairy tales over science? Or is Limbaugh their "leader", a rascist, opiate-addicted, fat and filthy, blowhard? I won't even mention Guiliani and Fred Thompson. Better to leave it unsaid.
They have no real leader, and yet we must be led. I never would have imagined that we'd yearn for the days of the Rockefellars or their ilk, the so-called Liberal Republican who, although they were clearly wrong and misquided, at least appeared to be sincerely intellectual in their approach.
Yes, a relapse to the control of today's "conservative" is to rejoin a doctrine of sheer stupidity, of fable over science, of bigotry over real equality, of greed over generosity, and, yes, of pure hard-core capitalism over shared, spread the risk and reward, socialism. We can't afford to go there, to go back, to choose ignorance over intelligence. If we do, we will lose and be destroyed for sure.
So, out of necessity, Obama must be made to succeed. He's there now, he is president, and he must succeed. There is no choice if we are to survive as a species. And the more that one hears talk of the "stimulus" as not being large enough, and of the banks really "owning" Obama, etc., the more unlikely it appears that he is on target on his own to succeed.
Therefore, logic dictates only one possible solution: activism, with a real sense of urgency, rarely achieved before in America. Yes, this is life and death. It's up to the people. The time is now!!
]]>
I could write a list of all the global emergencies that required real action about 8 years ago but received no action at all. But, to complain about Bush's BS, while true and valid, doesn't really go to solving the IMMEDIATE problems. Yes, I support deterrence so that it may not happen again, but if we don't solve, for example, global warming, who really cares. (to quote Dick Cheney).
Sadly, I've got to say that I don't see a solution. I've tried as hard as I can, but just don't see a real possibility of our continuing to exist, if at all, in anything even close to our present form.
It's in this context that Obama has offered me some undefined hope, but hope nonetheless. And it feels good to be at all optimistic.
But, as I write this article, I've got to be truthful. Somehow, in some way, (maybe in many, who knows) he won't succeed. I feel that there are no real grounds for hope. It's maybe ironic, but in that context maybe right wing power brokers have the correct idea: give up, grab all you can, and be gluttonously contented. But, that can't be correct, or otherwise it's unacceptable and unworkable thinking. Otherwise, what's wrong with being a drug addict, etc.? Hedonistic?
So, I conclude that we must have some sort of hope although I'm unable to find it. That being the case I must leave it to others. (And run the risk of being accused of accepting aging prematurely).
Yes, I must believe in some undefined hope. It's necessary for my continued existence. But, being unable to figure it out (even plausibly) I personally must leave it to others.
Good luck, and I mean it. I hope I'm wrong and wrong about Obama. I do believe in his good faith, just not in anyone's adequate ability.
So, I'll be checking in periodically. I'll remain somewhat curious. No cop-out here. Just may others go do it? Don't give up like me.
]]>Sure, it would feel good to me personally to witness Bush & co sent to jail (retribution), but we must overcome personal preferences. Also, it may not be good for our collective self esteem to see former leaders led away, but, again, there is no choice if our democracy is to survive. The real question that we must be prepared for is what happens if there is another terrrorist incident under Obama's watch? We know that it may be no fault of his or his administration but, nonetheless, he will be blamed badly politically for it. After all, the average independent in this country is willing to say "screw it" to torture, loss of constitutional rights, and all the rest, to be safe. Framed this way, the question really goes to the continuation of a free democracy or the imposition of a real dictator.
Also, I don't think that a discussion of this possiblilty is to waste time dealing with only a remote possibility. Terrorists are continually trying to gain entry across our admittedly porous borders, and the chances of at least one getting through and touching off a major incident is not minor. What will or should the left do in such circumstance?
The answer can only be the education of the public: to drill home the likelihood of a terrorist occurrence regardless of the effiicacy of efforts to stop it. In fact, we should be talking more of this now and not waiting for the event to happen. The alternative is the obvious crushing of any liberal leaning regime in this country, and a "goosestepping" in line while blindly following a leader who appears and calls for safety of the "homeland" at all costs.
I feel that it comes down to just that. If we are to retain any chance of a free and relatively open society (and avoid real dictatorship), we must stress the likelihood of another terrorist event regardless of the effort to prevent it. Can the public handle it? Better to err on the side of truth.
And that final thought (at the risk of oversimplification) summarizes what we can realistically hope for in the coming Obama Administration: in sharp contrast to the last 8 years, being open and truthful with the American people. Let's only hope.
]]>