Is there light at the end of the dank, dark tunnel that is the Democratic mindset? Will they realize that the future of opposing the Republicans lies in opposing the gov't they control, like I suggested? While I agree that populism is historically connected to the people voting themselves money (and "programs") from the treasury, I don't share Arthur Silber's view that populism cannot be redefined. Since the Republican party is basically designed to do the same thing, just only for the elite, couldn't the Democrats become the party that opposes welfare, corporate and popular, altogether? Should I be optimistic about this:
We're the "out party" now. Republicans control every nook and cranny of the federal government they still pretend they are fighting. Why on earth can't Democrats finally take advantage of hostility to Washington, supplementing anti-corporate populism with anti-government populism? Polls consistenly show that more than a third of Americans don't know who controls Congress. But how often did you hear any Democrats--not just Kerry, but congressional Democratic candidates as well--remind voters of that fact, or pledge to reform all the patent abuses of power in Washington, from corporate welfare to strong-arm partisanship to fiscal profilgacy? Why are we defending government programs, and demonizing every dishonest Republican claim to reform them, when Washington is being run by Republicans like a country club? Beats me.
The keys to a libetarian reform of the Democratic party are:
(1) As long as the moral majority craves value-based governance, the Democrats will never be able to win by appealing to the intellect (a point that Silber rightly makes). This election should be proof positive of that. So instead of mindlessly pretending that, no, the masses REALLY support your agenda, change your agenda to empower the individuals that support you as agents of reform. Masses don't think, but individuals do. Appeal to them. Give them something to vote for.
(2) Getting it through the thick heads of liberals that they cannot win the machinery of the state without resorting to the Karl Rove mentality. Therefore, social engineering and the big-gov't mentality that accompanies it must be jettisoned. Paint the Republicans and government with the same brush, and paint yourselves as the small gov't alternative. I don't even think they have to abandon state-run "safety net" ideas completely, but emphasize local and state programs instead of federal ones.
Read more...
Salon has a great article that I really think vindicates points that I made here as well as here. The Democrats have three choices, the way I see it: start a Marxist revolution, merge with the Republicans overtly, or embrace a more libertarian philosophy and really mean it. I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking this.
Arianna Huffington:
Already there are those in the party convinced that, in the interest of expediency, Democrats need to put forth more "centrist" candidate -- i.e., Republican-lite candidates -- who can make inroads in the all-red middle of the country.
I'm sorry to pour salt on raw wounds, but isn't that what Tom Daschle did? He even ran ads showing himself hugging the president! But South Dakotans refused to embrace this lily-livered tactic. Because, ultimately, copycat candidates fail in the way "me-too" brands do.
Camille Paglia:
Democrats have got to go cold turkey on their tedious old rhetoric about the suffering masses in their World of Pain. The Democrats' condescending portraits of African-Americans and the poor are manipulative, patronizing and ultimately self-destructive. The humanistic vision of progressive liberal politics (which I subscribe to) needs to be projected in inspiring, poetic language.Read more...
Why?! Why?! Why?!
One thing I know for certain: we will get what we deserve. We always do. We will become that which we fear.
I'm not as angry as this guy but I certainly understand the sense of impending doom and dread. What we have to do now is two things:
Convince the Democrats that this is not the 90s, and they do not have Clinton. They no longer can claim the title of the populists, and they need to drastically reshape their politics. If they want to oppose the Republicans, they're gonna have to find a way not only to provide a discernable alternative, but also to do it without looking down on traditional American values. The snobbiness must end. Because we all know that the Republicans are the real elitists; they just play the PR game nastier and better.
Keep riding the Bush Administration's ass. They may be unwilling to see reality, but I'm not willing to write off the rest of the electorate. Americans thirst for revenge, but they also recognize the validity of things like facts, figures, and body counts. Our job should be to continue to present the case against the policies of this administration.
And get ready for four more years of nastiness. Make peace with yourself, for it will be hard to find it outside. And thank God we won't have to listen to Rush Limbaugh bitch for the next 20 years while all hopped up painkillers.
Here's a post I did on a message board I frequent, but I thought I'd share it with you. Names have been changed to protect the innocent. I was responding to this:
The biggest obstacle to overcome when trying to push forth a geniune and progressive candidate will be overcoming Karl Rove's amazing slander/character defimation machine. Apparently, half the country is so simple-minded that they can't see through this veil.....or simply don't care to. How does someone beat that?
To which I responded:
Read more...
Well, I won't say who I voted for, but I'm glad it's over. We've now moved in our petty workplace conversations from the question of "for whom to vote" to "who will win". It's not quite as empirical a question as it used to be, but at least it doesn't involve me in quite as many polarizing conversations. Like the one I just had with my Dad. That lasted two hours. Yeah, those days are done.
Here's a picture of Gary, Sabine, and me from our visit to Avalon in rural Kentucky. Can you step to the vintage Libertarian campaign tee shirt? No you cannot.
We had a lot of fun (I think this is right after Sabine wiped the floor with our American asses in a game of H-O-R-S-E). Thanks to Gary and all the beautiful folks at L/L for hosting us. Thanks to Sabine for making the leap of faith to go thousands of miles from home and hang out with some creepy guy on the internet. Thanks to Tasha for putting up with me.
Aww, what the heck, another picture won't hurt. Here's me and Tasha in front of the A.R.E. Just don't forget to read my election rant!
Jeez, too pictures of me at new age hippy places. What will Acid Logic think of me?
Crackhayd, you so craaaaaaazy!
My brother Chris is gonna love this story!
A-ha, the election is tomorrow. I just want to say that I hope that, despite the dismal state of our electoral process, you find a candidate that you feel advances your interests, and that you vote for him. You may, however, rationally and reasonably choose not to vote. I respect that - I don't believe it is wrong for you not to vote, but at least have a good reason. Don't be lazy. At least claim you were hung over or something.
I have to admit that I really don't blame anybody for voting for Kerry as a "fuck you" to Bush, SO LONG AS YOU REALIZE WHAT YOU ARE DOING. Obviously, if you agree with Kerry's politics, that's a different matter, but if you find yourself largely siding with Kerry based on opposition to Bush, remember this: basically, what you are saying is that you have given up on the electoral process as a way to advance your interests. The only thing left for you to do is vote for whoever will harm your interests the least. You have no idea what Kerry will do - in fact, he will likely formulate similar policies as Bush on the so-called "War on Terror" (I hate that term because war IS terror, and because it sounds stupid) - but you know that it can't be worse than what Bush is doing. You have abandonded the concept that voting is supposed to be for the best man, and now you embrace the concept that voting is about choosing which poison is least damaging.
Unlike many libertarians, I do not say this contemptuously or sarcastically. This is a valid motivator of political action. However, it should be understood for what it is. All this hype about voting has made it appear that just filling out a ballot comprises your "duty" as a citizen. I am not so ignorant that I believe voting is some sort of moral or quasi-legal mandate, but I can at least safely propose that there is more to being an active citizen than simply showing up on November 2. Some honest reflection on your interests, your ideals, and your principles is warranted before choosing the most powerful man on earth.
Read more...
Where is a nice, solid brick wall when you really need something to bang your skull against?
Hey, I'm moving this site to my new domain, 6thdensity.net. From now on that's where I am. Peace.
Let me know what you think of the new site design.
That's right, Wil. I'm actually asking you to bitch.
My friend Matt has offered to host my blog on his personal service, LSBlog.com, but moving everything over there is such a pain. Blogger has no easy way to export posts to his place, let alone all the comments in HaloScan. Anybody have any advice on this? Should I just stick with Blogger? I'm getting a domain and webspace from him, so I could always just do the site feed thing.
Maybe it's just midweek blues, eh. If you're on the east coast, don't forget to hit up the Brothers Past run in Virginia this week.
I'm sorry, I know that I come off as Harry Browne's biggest fan, but the guy really does cut through the bullshit. And his assessment of America's track record is stunning:
World War I
Objective: Bring democracy to all the countries of the world, self-determination for everyone, and a new world order that would end wars forever.
Result: American entry into the war prevented the two sides from negotiating a just end to the war. Instead, the Allies saw American entry as decisive, and so they rejected all peace overtures, fought the war to a bitter end, won the war, and imposed devastating, humiliating peace terms on Germany.
The result was an expansion of the British and French empires, subjecting millions more people worldwide to foreign rule. In addition, millions of Europeans were herded into foreign countries.
Read more...
Wow, an article on Fox News that I can stand! Radley Balko has given us the most concise and comprehensive argument against Bush and Kerry that I have seen.
Like most "small L" libertarians, I'd like to see a constitutionally limited government, a humble but formidable foreign policy, unfettered free markets, and a premium on personal freedom.
Which is why I tend to get despondent around Election Day, and am again this year stuck with the classic "lesser of two evils" dilemma. The problem is that it's getting more and more difficult to discern which "evil" is lesser.
Not that I like Fox News now, but at least somebody is trying to appeal to the libertarians. I'm just sorta troubled that even the major media outlets are conceding that, yes, America is screwed.
As ashamed as I am to simply post somebody else's blog post, I couldn't resist. Besides, I'm lazy. This is from Assymmetrical Information.
This excellent post by Jim Lindgren sums up John Kerry's twenty year record of accomplishment in the Senate:
S.791: Authorizes $53 million over four years to provide grants to woman-owned small businesses. (1999)
S.1206: Names a federal building in Waltham, Massachusetts after Frederick C. Murphy, who was killed in action during World War II and awarded (posthumously) the Medal of Honor. (1994)
S.1636: A save-the-dolphins measure aiming "to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations." (1994)
S.1563: Funding the National Sea Grant College Program, which supports university-based research, public education, and other projects "to promote better understanding, conservation and use of America's coastal resources." (1991)
S.423: Granting a visa and admission to the U.S. as a permanent resident to Kil Joon Yu Callahan. (1987)
H.R.1900 (S.300): Awarded a congressional gold medal to Jackie Robinson (posthumously), and called for a national day of recognition. (2003)
H.R.1860 (S.856): Increased the maximum research grants for small businesses from $500,000 to $750,000 under the Small Business Technology Transfer Program. (2001)
S.J.Res.158: To make the week of Oct. 22 - Oct. 28, 1989 "World Population Awareness Week." (1989)
S.J.Res.160: To renew "World Population Awareness Week" for 1991. (1991)
S.J.Res.318: To make Nov. 13, 1992 "Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day." (1992)
S.J.Res.337: To make Sept. 18, 1992 "National POW/MIA Recognition Day." (1992)
This is the entire list of all the things that John Kerry has managed to get passed in the last twenty years.
Kerry supporters: explain why I should want a president who lacked the ability to get more than this pitiful list of bills through the senate.
Bush supporters: explain why this shouldn't gladden my libertarian heart.
That pretty much sums it up for me. Not that I agree with her on everything: her refusal to support Badnarik is pretty dumb, I think. The LP ain't perfect, but compared to where we are, it is the obvious place for libertarians to go. 'Course, you expect these kinds of opinions from the Objectivists (I assume with a name like Galt she's one).
Read more...
Fuckin' a.
Fuck you, John Saleeby. Jon Stewart rocks.
