LEFT OF DAYTON
Learning from the Cultural Conservatives,Part II: Talking Up The Worldview
Leave a Comment
This is Part II of a series on the strategies used by the conservatives to promote their worldview, and the lessons progressives can learn from them to promote our own. Part I is here.
As we saw in the previous post, the entire conservative movement was organized around the single goal of changing the country’s dominant worldview, weaning it away from liberal assumptions about how the world works, and teaching Americans to assign meaning to the world using conservative values instead. They firmly (and rightly) believed that that once the rest of the country evaluated and prioritized reality the same way they did, the rest of the conservative political, economic, and social agenda could be implemented with strong popular support, and no meaningful resistance.
But the early architects of this plan, including Paul Weyrich, also realized that having strong ideas wasn’t enough. To succeed, they would also have to master the arts of persuasion.
“Ideas do not immediately have consequences,” wrote Eric Huebeck in his 2001 update of Weyrich’s long-followed plan. “They do not have an impact in direct proportion to the truth they contain. They have an impact only insofar as adherents of those ideas are willing to take measures to propagate those ideas.”
Or, as a more cynical conservative once put it: You gotta catapult the propaganda.
This may seem like heresy to liberals. We like to believe that the progressive worldview is so patently superior that intelligent people will readily see the logic of it, and then sensibly adopt it as the best way to think and live. If people resist it, it’s only because they don’t completely understand it (yet). Fixing that is simply a matter of education: we just need explain our vision more clearly. Our own resolute faith in the power of reason convinces us that reasonable people will be reasonably persuaded by reasonable discussion of reasonable ideas.
It’s time to consider the reasonable possibility that we may be wrong. (more…)
Ha-Joon Chang’s ‘Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism’
Leave a Comment
Submitted by BuzzFlash on Fri, 02/29/2008 – 3:33pm.
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
by Ha-Joon Chang
Reviewed by Thom Hartmann
The fundamental myth of the Milton/Thomas Friedman neoliberal cons is that in a “flat world” everybody is not only able to compete with everybody else freely, but should be required to. It sounds nice. America trades with – and competes with trade with and for – the European Union. France against Germany. England against Australia.
But wait a minute. In such a “free” trade competition, who will win when the match-up is Canada versus the Solomon Islands? Germany versus Bulgaria? Zimbabwe versus Italy?
There are two glaringly obvious flaws in the so-called “free trade” theories expounded by neoliberal philosophers like Friedrich Von Hayek and Milton Friedman, and promoted relentlessly in the popular press by (very wealthy) hucksters like Thomas Friedman. (more…)
What the Hell Are Democrats So Afraid of? by Glenn Hurowitz
Leave a Comment
Like many progressives, I’d heard all the explanations for Democratic failings, and they all boiled down to this: a lack of smarts or competence. But was that realistic? After all, we’re the egghead party, the party of science, the party of the PhD. Could we really just be as stupid as we say George Bush is? What I’ve seen is something quite different: a lack of courage that makes Democrats afraid of implementing the strategies that work. It’s why even when Democrats win, they lose.
After Democrats took back Congress in 2006, Republicans still manage to bully Democrats and the media into controlling their agenda. It seems like Democrats forgot James Carville’s basic lesson of political summer school “It’s hard for your opponent to say bad things about you when your fist is in his mouth.” Unfortunately, too often, the Democrats are the ones coughing up fingernails. What follows is an excerpt from my new book, Fear and Courage in the Democratic Party (Maisonneuve Press), which illustrates this debilitating weakness in the Democratic Party. (more…)
FIRST KUCINICH, NOW EDWARDS…PROGRESSIVES BAIL OUT OF PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES.
Leave a Comment
So, with John Edwards announcing today his departure from the Democratic presidential primary field, what’s a progressive with a populist inclination supposed to do? As a previous post here noted, the idealogical scope of the Democratic field was diminished by Kucinich’s departure. With Edward’s announcement the breadth of political views becomes even more constrained. Ok, yes, former Senator Mike Gravel is still technically in the race, but his presence & impact is for all practical purposes is non existent.
I don’t like the Triangulator and her Democratic Leadership Council buddies. Wrong on the Iraq War and NOT anti-war enough. And, overall, despite her rhetoric, I see her as being too deeply entwined with the status quo to do much “changin’”.
And I just don’t know about Obama. Is a vision of Hope enough? Plus, his seemingly unequivocal support for US policies on Israel [Republican AND democratic] is a sticking point with me. We’ve had a failed Middle East policy for decades, with that department of the State Department seemingly outsourced to the Israel lobby. His remarks to the powerful American Israeli Public Affairs Committee in March of ’07 articulate that view and are posted at his website, indicating they represent his basic current position on the Middle East. http://obama.senate.gov/speech/070302-aipac_policy_fo/
I fear facing another election cycle when the most necessary accessory for the voting booth is going to be a clothespin. I sincerely hope that does not turn out to be the case!
Whose Side Is She On?? Pelosi greeted with “Impeach” Bush and Cheney buttons
Leave a Comment
Reuters
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she’s drawing heat from fellow Democratic lawmakers as well as people across the nation for refusing to move to impeach President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.
“I go through airports, and people have buttons as if they knew I was coming,” Pelosi said with a smile, mimicking a protester pointing to an “Impeach” button on their chest.
But the California Democrat said she is sticking to her position that trying to remove Bush or Cheney would be divisive, and she added, most likely unsuccessful. If the House voted to impeach Bush and Cheney, a two-thirds vote would be needed in the closely divided Senate to oust them.
Many Democrats and civil liberties groups have accused the Bush administration of misleading the United States into the Iraq war and violating the rights of U.S. citizens with its warrantless surveillance program. The White House denies the charges.
In helping Democrats win back control of Congress in 2006 from 
Republicans, Pelosi said she would not push for impeachment despite a number of calls to do so.
Speaking with reporters, she recalled that she wanted to focus on unifying the nation, passing the Democrats’ legislative agenda — not picking an impeachment fight with the White House.
“It was my belief that an impeachment of the Vice President or the President … would be very divisive in our country, and that is what I believed then,” Pelosi said. “It should have come to no surprise when I became Speaker I said it again, and I continue to hold that view.”
Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.
AN ANTI-IMPERIALIST VIEW OF “CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR”
Leave a Comment
IS THIS GUY FOR REAL?QUESTION ABOUT A JUDGES GAY “ETHICS” IS A JUDICIAL DISQUALIFIER
5 Comments
In a scurrilous attack reported in todays Dayton Daily News concerning Montgomery County Common Pleas Judge Mary Wiseman, County Area Judge James Piergies questioned whether Ms Wiseman shouldn’t recuse herself from cases that involve the states gay marriage law or the new Dayton anti-discrimination ordinance.
Wait a minute. Then what else did he say?? You’re kidding me? He didn’t REALLY say that Thurgood Marshal should have excused himself from appointment to the Supreme Court based on his history/involvement with Brown vs Board of Education?
Before I go any further, let us induct Judge Piergies into the Blue Dog Democrat Hall of Infamy. With two slurs in one commentary, the Judge is a shoo in.
Let’s get real. Based on his stated viewpoint, the only logical conclusion one can draw about the influence of sexual orientation on judicial proceeding’s is that heretofore, heterosexuals should excuse themselves from all cases involving, would you believe, heterosexuals?? It’s a perverted logic that also flows right into whether or not those with a history of civil activism should be judges in cases involving civil activism. Our inductee manages to be both racially and sexually insensitive at the same time. Not a particularly progressive position for a “d”emocrat.
Judge Piergies may sincerely and honestly believe that gays should still be in the closet. He may think that people of color should know their place. And, if those are his views, that opinion, in the America we all live in, is his inalienable right. Our Constitution protects bigots as well as civil rights activists.
The crucial issue here is whether we want people on the Judicial Bench who act fairly and impartially in applying the law or those who are openly bigoted.
For big “D” Democratic primary voters this should be a no brainer…
http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/01/17/ddn011708judges.html
UPDATE DDN 01/21/08/ Blog follow-up? Local attorney calls for judge to drop out of primary. http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/01/20/ddn012008judges.html
UPDATE #2, JUDGE WITHDRAWS FROM RACE 01/24/07
http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/01/23/ddn012308judgeweb.html
The Campaign for America’s Future>>It’s the Recession, Stupid
Leave a Comment
January 15th, 2008 – 4:12pm ET
It ain’t sexy, I know, but a word about the economy and the presidential debate.
Wall Street banks are holding a fire sale; employment is down, holiday sales tanked. Burdened with record debt and stagnant incomes, homeowners are about to reckon with declining home values, their largest investments, with a projected $2 trillion in assets evaporating in the course of the year. Even clueless George — “the fundamentals are strong” — Bush admitted a little stimulus might be needed.
So finally, the r word — recession — hit the presidential campaign trail. In the January Myrtle Beach Republican debate, the candidates were asked what they would do to get the economy going in the event of recession. The answers expose just how preposterous conservatism has become. (more…)
