But, we've ALWAYS done it this way...!
Two schools of thought, old school and new school got into an argument:
NS: "Where is the outrage?"
OS: "Outrage?! You won't get one thing accomplished with anger and outrage. People who know, who have actually made a difference do so in calm, measured ways."
NS: "Right. You mean the Big Change from 'Bad' to 'Worse?' Those are the only recent changes I can see. What, precisely, has improved?"
OS: (crickets chirping)
Color this chicken unimpressed with the old school. Maybe it is time to be really, really, really, angry. It's not like things are getting better. They're actually falling apart.
Just sayin'.
Advertisement
















I think it's time to add a pitchfork under that chicken's wing.
I haz torch.
July 25, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
ha!!!
I told you if George Will looked out of his window and saw thousands of men, women and children dying of hunger in the streets, he would calmly site Federalist Paper 131 or some such.
A little rage, indignation...not that bad sometimes.
July 25, 2009 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Deep thought:
You know, if only they'd listened to that oh so reasonable Dickinson back in 1776, we'd all be covered by the British National Health Service right now... at least if they extended it to the colonies...
July 25, 2009 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah but our capital would be in Qubec and we might all have to deal with the French and their language.
July 25, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Grrr......
July 25, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. India, too?
=D
July 25, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too late for me because I am really pissed!
While anger is acknowledged as a secondary emotion, coming after feelings/acknowledgement of injustice, disrespect, violations of morality and/or sense of powerlessness - it's healthy and needed for anger to replace and validate.
It's not the anger that's harmful - it's how we use the power of our anger in response to the source. It can be motivating or crippling; constructive or destructive; useful or useless and can be a gift or a burden. The outcome is if we choose to use anger as an excuse to just rant, contribute to chaos or a basis to achieve.
Now, can I please borrow the pitchfork?!? I'll return it after I'm done with the tasks at hand - and promise to wipe off all the evidence.
July 25, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
As long as you use it in on the right people, Sammie. And I know you will. And also ;)
You betcha.
July 25, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yez, there's few I'd trust with my pitchfork, but Auntie is one of the few, the proud, the angry!
July 25, 2009 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Lis and Bwak,
Since I'm definitely planning on 'stickin' it' to a few (no names, but pretty sure we have the same list in this effort), are the prongs made of steel? I've found it's always better to heat the metal up in fire first - also sanitizes well and destroys, well, you know.
Gives them a whole new feelin' about being in the hot seat!
Geez, it may be a while until I can get the pitchfork back to ya as this is definitely gonna be a 'bipartisan' covert action.
(Did I mention how totally pissed I am?!?!?!)
July 25, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tempered steel, and keep it as long as you like. I haz a spare one.
July 25, 2009 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
great post bwak ive been angry for a long time so i will get a pitchfork and join you
July 25, 2009 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, we'll all carpool to the capitol and walk around George Wills house a few times first.
July 25, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of the emotions involved in political or social activism, anger is the most treacherous to handle. Employed wisely, it can be devastatingly effective. Employed recklessly or self-indulgently, it can explode in your face.
In general, one's anger is best wielded not by telling others how angry you are, but by giving them graphic evidence that inspires them to arrive at anger through their own emotional instincts.
In another post, I tried to express this with the example of the early years of school desegration, when a young, black child, escorted by National Guard troops, walked to a previously all-white school in Arkansas down a sidewalk flank by throngs of white adults.
The girl was not angry. She was scared, but determined. Still, there was great anger in that scene. It came from the spitting, jeering, swearing adults, and it played itself out in media reshowings over and over. The American public watched it, and responding to the anger they witnessed, found no difficulty in deciding whose side they were on. Be sure to use anger carefully.
I link below to another example of someone who was very angry, again outraged by racial oppression, but chose simply and eloquently to desribe to her audience what there was to be angry about, and left it to them to do the rest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ZyuULy9zs
July 25, 2009 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fred, you rawk.
When people are affected by images, they get angered. When they are affronted by anger, they get defensive.
That's the difference.
July 25, 2009 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
The people who were affronted by the "anger" were the ones that effected change in Fred's little slice of history.
In fact, as far as examples go, it works just fine to me, just not the way Fred is intending it to.
We have our own brand of spitting hissing hate-filled uptight whities, and they don't post here at TPM.
Try little green footballs.
=D
July 25, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, right. This circular stuff again.
The people who responded to that anger were... what, Fred?
Were they "angry?"
'kay.
July 25, 2009 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but that's my point. The most effective use of your own anger is not to announce how angry you are or insult your adversaries, but to get your audience angry. It was the insults in Arkansas that exemplified counterproductive anger, while the graphic description by Lady Day evoked effective anger - more effective than if she had simply engaged in denunciations. That works for people who are already on your side, but is not a good tool for convincing the uncommitted.
July 25, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm afraid that our experience differs.
Showing ones anger is an effective way to engage people. You seem to equate anger with insults, but also seem to appropriate that type of sick anger with people here. Especially with your example.
That is in my view, derogatory and inaccurate. That we sometimes employ snark and sarcasm does in no way equate to the "hissing and spitting" in your example. What you are talking about is the modern equivalent of the Birthers, the Limbaughs, the Savages, and the Westboro Baptist "church." I really wish you'd find a more appropriate example.
The one you use is starting to make me angry.
=D
July 25, 2009 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to agree with you, Fred. But I also agree with Bwak. We need to get angry. Rage is not always destructive. It's how we channel it that determines how effective it's going to be.
Gandhi could rage in private, but when he spoke before crowds he rarely raised his voice.
MLK had a notorious temper, but he kept it under control in public.
Consider this brave and unforgettable essay by E.L. Doctorow called "The Unfeeling President". It is filled with rage--it oozes from between the lines. I can't read it without my heart pounding like a piston, yet there isn't a word in it that children wouldn't be allowed to read.
I'm guessing it took him many long nights to come up with just the right words. It wasn't written out of anger, but out of a long-simmering rage.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0920-13.htm
July 25, 2009 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, this makes me feel so proud that I was there.
Thanks for this Ramona.
July 25, 2009 11:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're welcome, Bwak. I go back and read it often. I don't know why but it gives me hope.
July 25, 2009 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you know where I stand Cheeken. A good rousing populist anger in the masses would go a long way towards stiffening the resolve of our more silver tongued leaders to represent our discontent effectively. Some here think our dialogue should transcend such rancor. My 2¢: save that for the beltway gatherings. If the internet isn't a bellwether of popular sentiment, regardless of the sophistication of the particular group of participants, (TPM?), then I'm a monkey's uncle.
July 25, 2009 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yez, I loved your blog, Meeguel. I just couldn't add anything, and I was kinda unexpectedly busy last evening.
It really covered everything. Especially stuff I didn't know I knew, if you catch my meaning. It was kind of like--truth recognition--and thanks for that.
I'm a plainspoken cheeckan, and a populist to my roots.
July 25, 2009 11:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, it is, for sure. But what is popular sentiment? Obama is great? Obama sucks? Limbaugh is great? Limbaugh sucks? How much influence do we really have? Who really listens to us?
(P.S. Better than being an uncle's monkey.)
July 25, 2009 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure who listens to us Ramona or what that means in terms of influence, but based on the numbers of unique visitors to TPM, that I've read about, it's a significant number of presumably relatively informed readers. Now that I've said that, I don't know why I would presume anything about them such as that, other than the fact that many bloggers here use big, (multisyllabic), words. :)
July 25, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can haz big wordz?
July 25, 2009 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I meant that for Miguelito. Sorry.
July 25, 2009 11:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's another example of how the best way to get what you want is to paint your audience a graphic mental picture that will make them angry rather than merely announcing your own anger (it works even if your own anger is feigned) -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI_Oe-jtgdI
July 25, 2009 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
In my experience healthy anger represents 'boundary issues, violations, etc.' it informs us that we are perceiving someone, someones, or something as violating our boundaries. It was actually my raising my daughter on my own that taught me this and how to use the information to improve our relationship by figuring out what I needed to do or express to feel that my boundaries were being honored, respected.
So in my perception healthy anger is useful and can spur us out of complacency and into action i.e. pitchfork. But because we are all human beings with emotions and varying perceptions of what is really going on in any given minute how I express my anger should really depend on the situation as it arises.
If I feel not heard and need to be listened to, in one situation it may require being calm and asking to be heard, another situation it may be that raising my voice is the 'only' way I begin to get heard.
I am of the school that there is no one way and we have to be present in the moment to decide exactly how to express ourselves in anger, love(love isn't always 'nice' can be yelling and grabbing poison from a child's hand), etc.
Whatever I decide to do, the most important thing is my desired results. Yelling, for example might get someone's attention but not get them to actually 'listen'.
So having never used the pitchfork, I will defer to others when they find a situation where that is called for and is effective.
But I still feel that overall the american people are complacent and have not gotten angry enough about the violations that have been perpetrated during the last eight years and that's why I don't see as much 'action' in response as I would like.
July 26, 2009 3:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Complacency is our biggest hurdle. It's so much easier to give in than to keep on fighting. Especially if we think it's a losing battle.
I agree that our anger has to be focused, and we have to think ahead to how best to channel it. But now we have to take stock and look honestly at what our complacency has brought us and what we can do about it. (And by "we" I mean the majority in our country--not necessarily you and me.)
I've been thinking about that essay by Doctorow--about how powerful and timely it was, and about what little effect it had on anything except the emotions of those few of us who were moved by it. It was published in October, 2004, a month before Bush was crowned president for the second time. There was nothing, it seemed, that was going to stop that momentum, giving the presidency to someone as unworthy of a second chance as George W. Bush.
We may think it was stolen again and that Ohio gave it to him, but the truth is, it was a squeaker just like the first time. If the numbers had been different, if enough voters had been less complacent and had actually fought to save the future of the country, he wouldn't have had a prayer.
Yes, the electoral college played a big role, but judging by his performance during the previous four years, it shouldn't have mattered WHO was running against him. Nobody could have done worse.
Big money steered the course but complacency cleared the path. We can't let that happen again. We have to focus our anger like a laser beam and aim straight.
July 26, 2009 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just had the thought. I wonder if the president expected more from us, thought we would be angrier, do more, etc.
July 26, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Synch, you may be right. Though I think our presence is more "out there" now than it's ever been. It could be that with the grand reception he got on and before Jan 20, he didn't expect so much opposition.
I wish he was stronger and could stand by his convictions. He can't brainstorm over everything. Sooner or later he has to make decisions based on the needs of the people and the best ways to go about it.
Screw the Republicans and the Fat Cats. They caused this mess, and now they want to oppose every idea to rectify it. They should be doing penance, not telling us all what to do. It's a crazy world.
July 26, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And screw the Dems and anybody else who sat back and let this happen. We're in the fight of our lives and they're STILL trying to pretend that they know what's best.
July 26, 2009 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, thank you. That is one of my points here.
However it has been done in the last 20 years is quite obviously the WRONG way. All positive change for the people in the country has been accompanied by public anger.
It's one of the best weapons we have, and it's high time we used it.
July 26, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
This strikes a chord with me. On some days, it sounds like a full set of chimes.
July 26, 2009 4:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Or a jingle?
July 26, 2009 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
When life hands you lemons, make lemonade. When government hands you pitch, fork it.
July 26, 2009 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
(pokes Donal with pitchfork)
Like that?
July 26, 2009 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seems it is anger vs. complacency. In my community, our yearly dues kept going up and up and no one seemed to be inclined to vote the board out of office. No outrage and the expenses growing from year to year. Our elections were a farce with little of the homeowners even bothering to vote. This year, perhaps due to the economy, people came out in droves and their anger was visible and the vote was for less spending and more action by the board to follow through on working with the community keeping expenses down. Anger does work and sitting back and saying nothing is giving up.
July 26, 2009 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
My issue is with the status quo people, who act as if sitting down and shutting up is some sort of virtue. When things are really bad, sitting down and shutting up is just the opposite-- It's deplorable.
I tend to resent people that council calm, and leaving it to our 'betters.' They aren't my betters and if they can't see what a mess they created it's time to call them out and demand they do. If they don't, I say we vote out every single one. and make it clear of our united intent to do so.
Politicians serve at the forbearance of the people, it's not the other way around, and too many seem to have forgotten who they work for. If everyone writes an angry letter, it'll will have a bigger impact the sweetness and flowers. Big time.
They "get" anger.
July 26, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
-Dylan Thomas
July 26, 2009 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well Sync, I hereby award you the Poetry Link of the Day for this here TPMCafe Site, given to all of you from all of me.
Beautiful poem. It seems especially so to a not so young man.
July 26, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Love:)
July 26, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's far better to be angry even if ineffective than to be silent and docile and allow evil to prevail which is precisely what has been going on in this country for many years. Rise up!
July 26, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a false dichotomy, oleeb. Anger is an important ingredient, indeed an essential ingredient in advancing needed social or political reforms, but it must be expressed wisely. None of us as angry individuals can accomplish nearly as much as we might by inspiring anger in the greater community. What I have been trying to assert is that there are effective and ineffective, even counterproductive ways, to attempt that. The most effective way is to employ graphic, emotionally compelling evidence that leads readers to respond with anger from within themselves. The least effective way is to engage in angry denunciations without evidence, and somewhere in between is a combined attack that purports to offer evidence but at the same time strives too hard to instruct the reader how to react to it.
It's also important for anyone who interacts with the public frequently, and who wishes to convey an angry message, not to be seen as a perpetually angry person. In fact, it is the individual who calmly endures minor offenses who is most convincing when he or she tells us, "I'm a patient person, but now I'm really upset". The writer who is perceived always to be on a rant is more likely to be ignored.
July 26, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, because that's the way it's aways been done, and things are so much better now!
Here's a graphic for ya Fred:
July 26, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Righteous outrage and dogged determination are what is needed at this point -IMHO. We need to push and keep pushing, and not think we've "won" with little gimmes to shut us up. I'm sick to death with the success of the people being bought off with bones that are then taken away, and palatable lies that people let put them to sleep. Want examples?
Global warming, oil scarcity, pollution, a woman's right to her body, equal rights amendment, civil rights, addressing institutionalized inequality, healthcare, campaign finance reform, FCC protecting local voice, and on and on.
Thank you for your anger dear bwak!
July 26, 2009 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan!!!!
I has missed you something terrible! Yez, I have gotten rather grumpy, but, I mean it's getting peculiar around here.
It would be one thing if there was no reason to be angry, but everything you've mentioned is a subject that has been politely debated to near-death...and our little democratic experiment along with it.
Ben Franklin supposedly answered the question of what type of government we had as, "a Republic, if you can keep it."
I seriously doubt that he thought we'd do so by being complacent. What amuses me, in a dark way, is that those who are calling for calm and restraint are the ones that are unreasonable. It is unreasonable to expect restraint in the face of these huge problems.
Rise Up!
July 26, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've missed you as well dearest bwak.
I believe that the complacency has been nurtured and manufactured. We are now in the throes of making the people so focused on survival that they don't pay attention to what our "betters" are doing. Unfortunately, those "betters" overlook that people can be pushed too far. That even sheep will turn and charge when cornered.
Instead, there has been less and less effort to even try to obscure the games being played. Perhaps this was the message taken from the Bush administration - you can act with impunity. Lie, break the law, line your pockets and handsomely transfer the wealth of the nation to where it will do you the most good. No one will stop it, and those who come after will look the other way. The people are viewed toothless yappers.
July 26, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I'm just not that angry right now. Should I find some anger button somewhere? Where is it located?
After eight years of George Bush, I think I've fried and blown out all my anger circuits. I'm looking forward to spending some time being mostly happy, which is more pleasant.
July 26, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, let's see.
Old School achievements: Medicare, Social Security, Civil Rights (including everything from the Voting Rights Act to Brown v. Board to the EEOC), Wage/Hour laws, a decent and balanced set of labor laws, a Federal minimum wage, Federal safety standards for everything from child seats to chewing gum, and serious protections for criminal defendants, including a right to counsel.
New School Acheivements: Getting Rielle Hunter knocked up.
October 2, 2009 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink