I’ve been meaning to post about Adolph Reed for several months now. I was reminded by (yet another) e-mail I recently received from a friend pleading with me that I vote for Barack Obama instead of Ralph Nader this November*. Their pleas laced with the assumption that I’d even be voting for Obama if Nader weren’t on the ticket.
Asking me to vote for a worthless candidate simply because the other guy is worse is akin to asking that I partake in participatory fascism. This is a microcosm of the larger problem the Left has had throughout the reign of the Neo-Cons for the past couple of decades.
Adolph Reed is a professor of Political Science at U Penn and he is one of the few folks with anything interesting (and sane) to say about the election. Reed’s piece “Sitting This One Out“, published in The Progressive late last year, clearly argues why expecting [insert any Democratic presidential candidate] to shift left after an election campaign that has appeased the right to get elected is but a wishful fiction.
Reed’s is a call for a different recognition of what a political movement entails — it is certainly not something you do once every four years. As he says, “We didn’t vote ourselves into this mess and we’re not going to vote ourselves out of it.”
Participating in a protest or a rally is also not a movement. It’s therapy (we all know it). As Reed argues, a political movement “happens through cultivating one-on-one relationships with people who have standing and influence in their neighborhoods, workplaces, schools, families, and organizations… This is how the populist movement grew in the late nineteenth century, the CIO in the 1930s and 1940s, and the civil rights movement after World War II. It is how we’ve won all our victories.” And as he points out, “it is also how the right came to power.”
Please read Sitting This One Out.
*After voting in every election since 1996, I decided a couple of years ago I was not going to vote at all. However, I recently decided to give it one last shot by voting for the candidate who, in my opinion, would be the best for the job. I ask that my liberal friends (especially) respect my Choice.
Related posts:
- Hijab Wearers banned from sitting behind Obama at Rally…….
- Obama is Making Me a Naderite
- Obama Losing Key Demo: Dogs
- Pragmatically Speaking, Democrats Should Nominate Obama
- Bumblitis…
The assumption that I’d even be voting for Obama if Nader weren’t on the ticket is, for me, a microcosm of the larger problem the Left has had throughout the reign of the Neo-Cons for the past couple of decades.
Neocons haven’t even been around for a “couple of decades”, QuiQui. And Americans weren’t voting for a neocon when they voted for Bush in 2000. Bush was against “nation building” and foreign interventions, and dramatically condemned Bill Clinton for engaging in both. These things are both at the core of neocon philosophy. Neocons are liberals who became conservative. It sounds like an oxymoron, but it’s not. What makes a neocon a conservative liberal rather than a leftist is they believe in captitalism and democracy rather than socialism.
McCain is not a neocon. Palin si MOST DEF not a neocon
I’m fairly sure there weren’t even any neocons running for national office this year. That’s not how they play the game anyway… they tend to prefer working behind the scenes, to insert their policies into more mainstream ideologies.
Posted by programmer craig | September 13, 2008, 10:30 pmThis is the first Programmer Craig comment I sort-of-agree with.
Except this part:
“”What makes a neocon a conservative liberal rather than a leftist is they believe in captitalism and democracy rather than socialism.”"
…which is pretty silly. I consider myself a liberal, not a leftist, but I know plenty of leftists who also believe in capitalism and democracy (and socialism has become somewhat like fascism in that there’s no decent commonly shared definition anymore that allows us to usefully discuss what is and isn’t socialism).
You’re also wrong on this point:
“”Neocons haven’t even been around for a “couple of decades”, QuiQui.”"
Simply look up the wikipedia entry for ‘neoconservative’ and read the first few paragraphs if you’d like to correct that premise.
The rest of what you wrote stands up decently.
Posted by Joe | September 13, 2008, 11:26 pm"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal"–Emma Goldman
Posted by Fayyad | September 13, 2008, 7:52 pmPeople who quote others make me sick! If you can’t write something that is strong enough to stand up on its own merit, just don’t write!
Posted by Anonymous | September 14, 2008, 8:43 amFayaad, ironically your statement applies perfectly to your beloved rulers in Gaza and the West Bank — but not so much in the US, foofy.
Posted by fad | September 14, 2008, 10:04 amEmma Goldman was a fucking fool. Care to explain to me how if Al Gore had won in 2000, the last eight years would have all gone so totally similarly?
Posted by Joe | September 15, 2008, 12:47 amFirst of all, my apologies for not scrolling to the end of your post. You already posted that the soldier was jailed. It was my error not to notice your “read more” button hidden on the bottom left of your post.
My point is that military law is different from civilian law. This is true in most countries including the United States. The penalties are almost always lesser in these sorts of cases. Bottom line is that the soldier was given punishment. A punishment that a Palestinian counter-part wouldn’t receive if the roles were reversed.
And I think you need to take notice that it was an ISRAELI news source that you linked to in your blog post (Ynet). It was Israel who announced the story. There was no cover-up. No one tried to sugar coat it. Don’t even get me started on the Palestinian media in comparison.
Posted by Ms. Missive | September 15, 2008, 11:05 amI think we all remember the hero reception of those who murder Jewish civilians and bash Jewish children’s heads against a rock, and even those fuckers on this blog who celebrated, defended and rationalized the reception given to Kuntar.
No comparison.
Arab society welcomes death – the death of Jews in particular – and it always has.
Posted by Anonymous | September 15, 2008, 12:07 pmMs. Missive hasn’t yet perfected using the Internets. She replied to the wrong post. Please try again.
Posted by bonty | September 16, 2008, 10:39 amJoe,
This is the first Programmer Craig comment I sort-of-agree with.
That would be so much more cool, if I knew who you were
I consider myself a liberal, not a leftist…
I don’t know what the word “liberal” means, teh way you use it, then. I’m a libertarian. Libertarians used to be called “liberals” before socialists started calling themselves “liberal”. It’s all very confusing, I know, but I’m not aware of a third concept of “liberal” in the United States. You mean you believe in individual rights and are consequently socially liberal? People on the left are “socially liberal” but without the belief in individual rights. They believe in governmental rights, and rights for the elite. That’s what makes them socialists, rather than true liberals.
but I know plenty of leftists who also believe in capitalism and democracy
Really? Because, I don’t know any at all. Are you sure they are leftists? If so, are you sure they aren’t lying to you about liking democracy and capitalism?
(and socialism has become somewhat like fascism in that there’s no decent commonly shared definition anymore that allows us to usefully discuss what is and isn’t socialism).
That’s because American socialists have been spending a lot of time and effort over the last 50 years trying to obfuscate what their true political philosophies are. By calling themselves “liberal”, for instance. Socialism is in fact the very opposite of liberalism.
Socialists believe the good of the society as a whole comes first, and that government is the rightful caretaker (babysitter) of the people. Liberals (real ones) believe the good of the individual comes first, and that government powers need to be kept in check, in order to prevent unwarranted and unwanted intrusion into the lives of the people.
Which of those two do your “leftist” friends believe in?
By the way, there is another category of people that are sometimes confused with leftists. Anarchists. An anarchist is very similar to a liberal, except that where liberals believe government is a necessary evil, anarchists don’t believe government is necessary at all.
Simply look up the wikipedia entry for ‘neoconservative’ and read the first few paragraphs if you’d like to correct that premise.
That isn’t necessary. The first time I voted for President was Reagan’s second term, in 1984. No neocons of substance around, on the ground, back then. I don’t need to read a wiki link to tell me that.
The rest of what you wrote stands up decently.
Thanks
Posted by programmer craig | September 16, 2008, 2:08 pm""That isn't necessary. The first time I voted for President was Reagan's second term, in 1984. No neocons of substance around, on the ground, back then. I don't need to read a wiki link to tell me that.""They were already well-travelled in the elite circles at that point, and the elite circles are what matter for the purposes of political discussion. They had house organs like Encounter (Irving Kristol) and Commentary (Norman Podhoretz), and were getting written up — Wikipedia links to a NYT Magazine article from '82 entitled "The Neoconservative Anguish over Reagan's Foreign Policy".
Posted by Joe | September 17, 2008, 3:02 pmEnlightening blog post. The blog was to the point and just the information I was looking for. I can’t say that I agree with all you mentioned but it was emphatically absorbing! BTW…I found your site through a Yahoo search. I hope you’ll permit me to post a link to a site pertinent to the Obama quote discussed in your blog post. I’m a frequent visitor to your blog and will return againsoon.
Posted by Margorie Essery | October 12, 2010, 12:45 pmEnlightening article. The blog was to the point and just the information I was looking for. I can’t say that I agree with all you mentioned but it was definitely fascinating! BTW…I found your site through a AOL search. I hope you’ll permit me to post a link to a site pertinent to the quote by George Bush discussed in your blog post. I’m an occasional visitor to your blog and will return againsoon.
Posted by Celia Miran | October 12, 2010, 4:06 pmAll I know is that I am eployed at a large Pharmaceutical corporation in Clayton NC and I support Barack Obama with all my energy. I invite all my friends and colleagues to vote for Obama in 2012!! I LOVE YOU OBAMA
Posted by Diane Pearce Loves Obama | March 25, 2011, 1:11 pm