FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Wolf writes: "What we are witnessing in the drama of increasingly globalized protest and repression is the subplot that many cheerleaders for neoliberal globalization never addressed: the power of globalized capital to wreak havoc with the authority of democratically elected governments."

Portrait, author and activist Naomi Wolf, 10/19/11. (photo: Guardian UK)
Portrait, author and activist Naomi Wolf, 10/19/11. (photo: Guardian UK)



The Streets of 2012

By Naomi Wolf, Al Jazeera

03 January 12

 

hat does the New Year hold for the global wave of protest that erupted in 2011? Did the surge of anger that began in Tunisia crest in lower Manhattan, or is 2012 likely to see an escalation of the politics of dissent?

The answers are alarming but quite predictable: we are likely to see much greater centralization of top-down suppression - and a rash of laws around the developed and developing world that restrict human rights. But we are also likely to see significant grassroots reaction.

What we are witnessing in the drama of increasingly globalized protest and repression is the subplot that many cheerleaders for neoliberal globalization never addressed: the power of globalized capital to wreak havoc with the authority of democratically elected governments. From the perspective of global corporate interests, closed societies like China are more business-friendly than troublesome democracies, where trade unions, high standards of human-rights protection, and a vigorous press increase costs.

All over the world, the pushback against protest looks similar, suggesting that state and corporate actors are learning "best practices" for repressing dissent while maintaining democratic facades. In the United Kingdom, Prime Minister David Cameron routinely impugns human-rights laws; the Metropolitan Police have sought authority to use baton rounds - foot-long projectiles that have caused roughly a dozen deaths, including that of children, in Northern Ireland - on peaceful protesters; and a police report on the threat of terrorism, distributed to "trusted partners" among London businesses, included updates about Occupy protests and referred to "suspected activists."

The UK has stringent internal-security legislation, but it never had a law like the United States Patriot Act. After anti-austerity protests in early 2011, followed by riots in major cities in August, the Metropolitan Police claimed powers to monitor private social-media accounts and smartphones. And, under the guise of protecting this summer's Olympics against terrorism, the British military is establishing a massive base in London from which SAS (special forces) teams will operate - a radical departure from Britain's traditional civil policing.

In Israel, Ha'aretz reports that Occupy-type protests have been met with police violence, including a beating of a 15-year-old girl, and threats of random arrest. Israel, like Britain, has seen a push, seemingly out of nowhere, to enact new laws crippling newsgathering and criminalizing dissent: a new law makes it potentially a crime to donate to left-wing organizations, human-rights laws have been weakened, and even investigative reporting has become more dangerous, owing to stricter libel penalties. Ha'aretz calls the push "the new feudalism."

Finally, in America, the National Defense Authorization Act, enacted by Congress in December, allows the president to suspend due process for US citizens, detain them indefinitely, and render them for torture. One should not be surprised to see similar legislation adopted in democracies worldwide.

Not only are laws criminalizing previously legal dissent, organizing, and reporting being replicated in advanced democracies; so are violent tactics against protesters, backed by the increasing push in countries with long traditions of civil policing to militarize law enforcement.

Indeed, increasingly sophisticated weapons systems and protective equipment are being disseminated to civilian police officers. In the US, the federal government has spent an estimated $34 billion since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to arm state and local police forces with battlefield-grade hardware. Investigative reporting has also revealed cross-pollination of anti-protest training: local police from cities like Austin, Texas, have been sent to Israel for training in crowd control and other tactics.

The globalization of mercenaries to crack down on dissent is also proceeding apace. Mercenaries are important in a time of global grassroots protest, because it is easier to turn a foreigner's guns or batons against strangers than it is to turn the military or police against fellow citizens. Erik Prince, the head of the most infamous outfit, Academi (formerly Xe Services, formerly Blackwater), has relocated to the UAE, while Pakistani mercenaries have been recruited in large numbers to Bahrain, where protesters have been met with increasingly violent repression.

But this apparently coordinated pushback against global protest movements is not yet triumphant - not even in China, as the people of Wukan have shown. While the outcome of the villagers' protest against the local government's confiscation of their land remains uncertain, the standoff reveals new power at the grassroots level: social media allows sharper, coordinated gatherings and the rapid dissemination of news unfiltered by official media. The Internet is also disseminating templates of what real democracy looks like - instantly and worldwide.

Not surprisingly, people use this technology in ways that indicate that they have little interest in being cordoned off into conflicting and competing ethnicities, nationalities, or religious identities. Overwhelmingly, they want simple democracy and economic self-determination.

That agenda is in direct conflict with the interests of global capital and governments that have grown accustomed to operating without citizen oversight. It is a conflict that can be expected to heighten dramatically in 2012, as protesters' agendas - from Occupy Wall Street to Occupy Moscow - gain further coherence.

Much is at stake. Depending on the outcome, the world will come to look either more like China - open for business, but closed for dissent - or more like Denmark.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+26 # RMDC 2012-01-03 19:13
Thanks Naomi, great as usual.

Let's not forget that the suppression of OWS was organized and coordinated nationally by FBI, DHS, and CIA. All of these agencies report directly to Obama. It is not conceivable that they began their coordinated suppressing without the approval of Barak Obama. The buck stops on his desk.

During the campaign, Obama said that he would get out his comfortable shoes and march with unionists. But as president he ignored the union busting in Wisconsin. He did not march with unionists there. And now he is chiefly responsible for the crackdown on the OWS.

Obama has to go. The mainstream liberals and democrats are afraid to criticize him because he is their dream candidate. If a republican would have signed the NDAA, these same liberals would have been squealing like stuck pigs. But they are silent now. Obama is worse than a republican because he silences liberals when civil liberties are smashed.

I know Ron Paul has some unsavory sides, but he is not a murderer like Obama is. I hope he runs 3rd party. I think a Ron Paul + Ralph Nader ticket could beat any republican or democrat.
 
 
-25 # Spence 2012-01-03 23:20
At least under a Republican president we the people could be united in opposion.
 
 
+39 # Peace Anonymous 2012-01-04 00:26
Quoting Spence:
At least under a Republican president we the people could be united in opposion.

Were the Republicans united in opposing Bush? I do not believe there has ever been a group more committed to looking the other way than the political right in the past 15 years. And the democrats are hardly any better. It is the system, not specific parties or legislation, that is flawed.
 
 
+30 # lin96 2012-01-04 06:23
Dream on. Even after the fact, Bush and Cheney still believe in torture. We are where we are today because of 8 years of Bush making changes to this country. We have the first elected President living in this country in exile. In Europe there are indictments by Interpole for Bush and Cheney and their crimes against humanity. (namely torture) If they go there they could be arrested. So you won't see them going there. Our President is doing nothing, so they're safe here.
 
 
+1 # carioca 2012-01-06 04:33
Under a Republican president abortion would be illegal, lethal injection would be legal, and war would be standard
 
 
+2 # LessSaid 2012-01-04 08:42
Quoting RMDC:
I know Ron Paul has some unsavory sides, but he is not a murderer like Obama is. I hope he runs 3rd party. I think a Ron Paul + Ralph Nader ticket could beat any republican or democrat.


That's only because he hasn't had the chance to be a murderer. They are all killers once they become president. Additionally, a Paul - Nader would one get about 15% to 20%. Such a ticket would assure a Obama victory.
 
 
+2 # Doubter 2012-01-04 17:16
Methinks you give Obama too much credit for autonomy. I see him as a figurehead; a puppet on a string, a lapdog on a leash, if you will..
 
 
+1 # RLF 2012-01-05 06:45
Who yanked the leash when he appointed Geithner, Summers,Holder and told him to prosecute no one, and any number of crappy people to his addministration . He isn't weak, he is a Republican trying to avoid looking like one.
 
 
+35 # Willman 2012-01-03 20:00
The deep political divide in the USA is great for continuation of the status quo.
Remember "United we stand" "Divided we fall"
Large numbers of people goaded on by the talking heads of tv land continue to set upon other large numbers of people in our great land.
 
 
+9 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-01-04 10:55
I say this with a U.S. Pres., Andrew Jackson, hanging in my family tree:

Wannabe great nation? Sure. Actual great nation? Not. How so?

"You Yanks are too naive to recognize you've had a coup d'etat." The comment was made to me in Ireland, following the outage of our internationally outlawed torture m.o..

And, the longer I live in today's U.S. of (greed and power) A.(ddiction), I recognize how we, myself included, have been so karlrovingly MSD'ed (manipulated, spun, distracted). It's a toss up who MSD's us best - the Greedy Old Partiers, the OhBombAh style Dems., the 'mess media' and all the undeserved attention it pays to caca caucuses and political puppet whores who MSDingly run for office, etc. evil etc.. Democracy, rule of law, free press, et. al, in the toilet and/or flushed away.

It's hard to say, but it is the truth:

ASHAMED TO BE AN AMERICAN!!!
 
 
+7 # bugbuster 2012-01-04 11:35
Thank you, Willman, for helping me make my case against ideology per se, be it right-leaning or left-leaning.

Ideology is now exposed as discredited, counterproducti ve prejudice.

I am going to defend President Obama now and rejoice in his re-election precisely because ideologues on both sides of the aisle hate him. He is championing democracy in the only way anyone in his position could at this point in time. He is not doing a perfect job, but I don't think there is anyone out there who could do better.

*Democracy is working when nobody likes what it is doing. That's the nature of compromise.* It's the worst system you can imagine, and the only one that has a prayer of working, however unsatisfactoril y for people who throw tantrums when they don't get their way.

In this spirit, I steadfastly support OWS as an essentially ideology-neutra l movement.

Incidentally, I always read and learn from Naomi's articles and appreciate her insights. I would like her to give us her detailed analysis of NDAA. After reading it myself, it doesn't look as threatening to me as it does to others. I'm sure that's my shortcoming, and I would like Naomi, a clear-thinking analyst, to enlighten me.
 
 
+5 # BradFromSalem 2012-01-04 13:51
bugbuster,

You're optimistic point that Obama is doing the best he possibly can may be true. I also think you would agree that, whether it is true or if Obama is just another Centrist leaning Right the push to return the country to its Liberal roots must continue.

You may also be right about NDAA, however my guess is that there is arcane legal wording built in to make our worst fears seem like fairytales. (And I'm an optimist!)
 
 
+4 # RLF 2012-01-05 06:48
My! Aren't we wearing the rose colored glasses!
 
 
+37 # DaveM 2012-01-03 22:55
We have seen the largely non-violent "Arab Spring" descend into ever-increasing bloodshed as governments (including those put into power by protesters)resp ond to dissent by shooting back. We have not, thankfully, seen such escalation in this country but with the NDAA now signed into law along with other measures, I fear it is only a matter of time.
 
 
+14 # 666 2012-01-03 23:18
when all of this shakes out, we're either going to have 1984 (sorry to use the apparent cliche, but it's true and NKorea is an example of "best practices" - a country designed by the book [1984]) or we're going to be moving rapidly in the direction of a one-world democracy. I hope it's the latter.
 
 
+4 # RLF 2012-01-05 06:51
This country is too big to have any semblance of real democracy and you want world democracy...wha t that means to me is world corporatocrasy and perfect extraction of capital from the 99%.
 
 
+54 # Lowflyin Lolana 2012-01-03 23:19
Nothing is going to change until a majority of people understand that the TV is not showing reality.
 
 
+48 # DPM 2012-01-03 23:21
OCCUPY!
 
 
+16 # Activista 2012-01-04 00:00
Naomi is perfect - see the big picture globally - RMDC is sharp, knowledgeable.
The need for the third party candidate is unquestionable - status quo would be disaster.
here is economy/Stiglit z - "When it comes closing the gap on the country's $1+ trillion deficit on $14+ trillion in debt, Stiglitz says the country can turn things around in 4 relatively easy steps:
1. Repeal the Bush-Obama tax cuts for the richest Americans.
2. End the WARS in Afghanistan and Iraq, "that have not improved our security" and are costing trillions of dollars.
3. Get Americans back to work. Stimulus and works programs are politically untenable right now but Stiglitz says spending on these programs will ultimately reduce the debt because if we put people to work and "our tax revenues will increase enormously"
4. Reform Medicare Part D - Under the current law, big pharma sets their own prices. Stiglitz says if that provision is eliminated and the government can negotiate drug prices it would save taxpayers $1 trillion over the next 10 years."
5 (by RSN hasapiko) --- add to that contain health care costs and higher ed costs that are strangling the middle class.
There are smart Nobel laureates Americans - can they team with "politician" and run as independent?
There are ethical, educated people without ideology/specia l interest? - is there a politician in the US that can translate these IDEAS into votes?
 
 
+7 # gdp1 2012-01-04 08:53
...Yes...these 4 steps...but...S tiglitz posts elsewhere that this WON'T happen...that the 1 per-centers are entrenched...aw are...and ahead of OWS with HESSIAN MERCENARIES ready to crack down...all you piddly-puss libertarians got what?...NOTHING ...just a bunch of Internet gas-bags...it's too late for translating ideas into votes...it's time to translate Mao
 
 
+8 # Activista 2012-01-04 13:58
OWS has one plus - these are OUR children in the street. NON-Violent change is ONLY OPTION - power of powerless.
I do not want a bands of ex-soldiers from Iraq, Afghanistan to terrorize US cities as "rebels" do now in NATO "liberated" TRIPOLI.
 
 
+2 # Doubter 2012-01-05 19:29
A more succinct statement of what we need is:
A REAL/independen t (of control by money) government. (for the people by the people)
Everything else would follow.
 
 
+11 # annagolinska 2012-01-04 05:14
Wrong conclusion. United states is becoming one huge psychiatric hospital.
The changes are following patterns of American mental health system where you can be discredited and killed at any time by "certified" hands and the Truth is discredited with the court order of lie. Nobody is paying attention to violations by American bio-psychiatry and its deceptive and fraudulent diagnostic system as a model for controlling people but it is punitive psychiatry in China, Russia and elsewhere that takes care very effectively of descendents. Disorders are to discredit not to help to cure.
Medicine has became the form of population control and psychiatry is it's direct execution front. Noami is looking for model in geography-histo ry. We are actually living in the future now. It is not coming from China or Denmark. It is coming from within the current system: psychrights.org .
 
 
-11 # Robt Eagle 2012-01-04 06:45
Ms. Wolf writes: "In the US, the federal government has spent an estimated $34 billion since the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to arm state and local police forces with battlefield-gra de hardware." Exactly the reason that we have the Constutional Right to Bear Arms to defend ourselves from a government that might try to control the populace by its own police. If everyone in the US is armed and able to defend themselves, then no need to worry about a police state. When the gov't starts taking away our right to own and bear arms, well then it is really time to worry. Get rid of Chuck Shumer is a good start because he thinks the weapons are the bad policy. He totally does not understand that good people will use those weapons only to defend themselves and our liberties. By the way, I don't own a firearm, yet I am super happy most of my neighbors do. I am an archer and have lots of bows and arrows, all longbows and wood arrows, so don't go luny and try to cite me as a gun nut!
 
 
+16 # Capn Canard 2012-01-04 10:22
Robt your blindness is stunning... the people will not be able to coordinate quickly enough and if they did then their resistance would paint them as terrorists resulting in a military attack(this would not end well for citizens)... consequently, they more than likely would be sent to prison as enemy combatants without habeas corpus, we are screwed coming and going. There is no way that the people will be able to resist such a police state. I predict that the level of violence would rival SE Asia killing fields and it would be at the behest of the corporate state and the Wealthiest, the 0.001%. The bottom line is all important. And it is clear that Multinational Corporations are now the people.

BTW that old argument that guns will protect you is lost when you have to rely on your neighbors to carry the load to cover your sorry azz. Hope they find enough value in you to put their lives on the line.
 
 
+8 # BradFromSalem 2012-01-04 14:07
So the people are armed. Big Whoop!

Soldiers in body armor that are using night goggles and heavy artillery against hunting rifles are going to lose?

Also, consider this. The FIRST Amendment allows the people the right to peacefully assemble to air grievances (Occupy). The SECOND amendment DOES NOT call out the right to bear arms as a tool to air grievances. (A caller yesterday to Thom Hartmann brought out this point).

Even at the time of the Revolution, military grade firearms were superior to what most farmers had.
 
 
+2 # RLF 2012-01-05 06:54
That is what the army thought in Afganistan. That's what the army thought in Vietnam.
 
 
+23 # walt 2012-01-04 07:16
If we don't get control of the laws, the lawmakers, and those who supposedly enforce them, dissent and freedom of speech are seriously in danger. We are living in a Bush-created environment where police states have been sold to the public under the guise of "anti-terrorist protection."
 
 
+6 # jcdav 2012-01-04 09:42
Correct. and our ONLY hope for "change" is to hit the streets enmass to protest then ELECT responsible folk who will make elections federally funded-ZERO contributions.. .then we have a chance. We could sit at home till we are totally enslaved..we are headed for a feudal society unless we stop this NOW. UNASS, folks because if you wait till many more NDAA (martial law) laws get enacted any protest will be "terrorism" and you will be disappeared. Rbt Eagle is right this time an armed citizenry is a deterrent to opressive gvt. The only rub is can the oppressor do the repression slow enough that it is complete (and unnoticed) by the time folks can react... Act peacefully NOW.. communicate the knowledge you have with friends and neighbors ( 5 days agomentioned NDAA to 6 ofmy friends & Neighbors- NONE HAD HEARD a word about it!) if we can get enough folks on the street either "they" will realize the jig is up OR they will try to repress us.
 
 
0 # BKT just because 2012-01-04 07:53
Is is possible that for Corporate America, an Obama win in 2012 might not be so bad. Obama is so busy ducking the punches that we could end up dancing around the ring for another 4 years and accomplishing nothing while the people get demoralized. Obama is not standing on his principles, He needs to act from his conscience or get out of the ring. We need someone to rally around.

I thought of voting republican this year, just to bring the fight to a head. Give the Republicans enough rope and they may hang themselves. We may require that fuel to fire real change. If the democrats lose in 2012..don't lose heart. This may herald in a true united front for real change. Just maybe.
 
 
+6 # gdp1 2012-01-04 08:55
....Obama...the best Republican out there...
 
 
+8 # wfalco 2012-01-04 08:33
I tend to think the world will eventually become more like Denmark, as Ms. Wolf suggests as a possibility. The Chinese, open for business outcome, just won't cut it in today's technological world where everyone knows what is going on everywhere. Too many people and too much information to permit that extreme to permeate societies en masse. The Arab Spring has shown us the power of the information age.
But like anything else that is good for the masses-change will take time and will occur incrementally. The cult of personality is nearing an end as displayed in the OWS movement-a good thing.
To read here that " I think Ron Paul & Ralph Nader ticket could beat any republican or democrat" is absurd.
First of all(with the exception of some foreign policy issues)those two gentlemen are political polar opposites.
It seems many liberals are so willing to overlook the bulk of what Mr Paul's libertarianism stands for-deregulatio n of polluting industries and privatization of social services, including Social Security and the public school system. How can one realistically think this man would run on a ticket with Nader- who is most responsible for consumer protection and industrial regulation in the modern era?
 
 
+5 # LessSaid 2012-01-04 08:53
One of the problems in the America political system is the critizenry. Most of us are united around a political party as oppose to an individual we select to represent our interest. Also, we are willing to be brought off with a few promises of a better life at the expense of another group/race.
 
 
+6 # WaldenPond 2012-01-04 10:19
Thank you, LessSaid, you are right that Americans tend to be loyal to Republicans or Democrats. The problem is, those two parties are not ideologically different. They are both right-wing, pro-war, pro-corporation s parties. In Nov. 2012, we will probably have a choice between two candidates, both of whom think it is a good idea to blow up nuclear refineries and nuclear reactors. That is largely unnoticed because the two parties trick the population into focusing on the candidates personalities, looks, speaking abilities, sexual lives, religious beliefs, skin color, etc. In other democracies (Europe, Canada), there are many parties, each with unique political ideologies, and there is little interest in the candidates' personal characteristics . In fact, in most democracies, the voters elect parties to the parliament, and then the parties or coalitions of parties chose the national leaders. US democracy needs real political parties, and needs voters to vote based on ideologies and policies, not based on advertising campaigns that focus on surface aspects of the candidates. In 2012, vote for third parties. Vote against the Dempublican Party.
 
 
+1 # LessSaid 2012-01-04 14:10
Quoting WaldenPond:
Thank you, LessSaid, you are right that Americans tend to be loyal to Republicans or Democrats. The problem is, those two parties are not ideologically different. They are both right-wing, pro-war, pro-corporations parties. In Nov. 2012, we will probably have a choice between two candidates, both of whom think it is a good idea to blow up nuclear refineries and nuclear reactors. That is largely unnoticed because the two parties trick the population into focusing on the candidates personalities, looks, speaking abilities, sexual lives, religious beliefs, skin color, etc. In other democracies (Europe, Canada), there are many parties, each with unique political ideologies, and there is little interest in the candidates' personal characteristics. In fact, in most democracies, the voters elect parties to the parliament, and then the parties or coalitions of parties chose the national leaders. US democracy needs real political parties, and needs voters to vote based on ideologies and policies, not based on advertising campaigns that focus on surface aspects of the candidates. In 2012, vote for third parties. Vote against the Dempublican Party.


Very well said!
 
 
+11 # brianf 2012-01-04 09:19
I think one reason this was passed is that leaders are worried about what will happen a few years in the future. Global warming appears to be on the verge of going out of control, and the tipping point looks like it will come as early as 2013-2015. At that point the effects still won't seem too bad, but once it goes out of control, the changes will be much more rapid, and unstoppable. By as early as 2025, food prices will be so high that we will have protests here comparable to the Arab Spring, with huge masses of people trying to overthrow the government. The economy will crash next. Wall Street will collapse too, but at that point people will be occupied with finding enough food to survive. Millions of desperate, hungry people with guns is not going to be pretty.

If you don't believe me about the global warming part, visit arctic-methane- emergency-group .org and read the letter this group of Arctic climate experts sent to world leaders last month.
 
 
+7 # WaldenPond 2012-01-04 10:22
What? High food prices by 2025? Reality is high food prices now, starvation in poor countries now, and deaths by starvation in developed countries by 2015. We just had a price jump in bread and milk, so much that my family decided to stop buying it.
 
 
+10 # Buddha 2012-01-04 09:54
This just shows that the true power no longer resides in nation-states, but in as Naomi put it, "globalized capital". The worlds billionaires and trans-national investment houses like Goldman Sachs and multi-national corporations really run the show, and you can see they are laying the ground-work for a coming global corporate-Polic e State. Will be interesting to see if any developed nation is able to remain free.
 
 
+2 # vicnada 2012-01-04 15:29
All good, Naomi, except your last line. Denmark's good PR services have seen to it that their image of the "happiest" country is maintained. However, having married a Dane and lived in Copenhagen for a year, I can attest to the fact that a little scratching reveals much rust. How, for example, do you explain the aggregious abrogation of human rights and due process when it comes to foreign-looking spouses caught in divorce with children? See this blog for a taste of what's real in Denmark: http://portal.foreignersindenmark.dk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3888&PN=2
 
 
+2 # Activista 2012-01-04 16:59
Denmark has lot of dark corners - white supremacists etc. - it is risky to pick up nation/state as a future utopia.
I would prefer Norway - but the above applies there also.
Is nation/state the problem? not the solution?
 
 
+4 # Activista 2012-01-04 16:54
When I read Naomi Wolf or Naomi Klein - it is almost scary that generation and culture apart we see the global issues - from environment to politics - the same way.
These intellectuals give me sanity, optimism - this is new generation - new America.
 
 
+2 # cordleycoit 2012-01-04 23:17
The Wolf is spot on on the picture but did not troll for solutions. IS and the Marxists know they missed the point and neoliberalism equals slavery. Extreme capitalism needs more bayonets and barbed wire to n be enforced. I see nothing but chains in the hands of economists, a disreputable lot. Anarchists run to primitive except the Sits who are wary of working on a new economy. Not much heavy lifting happening.
 
 
+7 # Uppity Woman 2012-01-05 01:51
I think Naomi is correct that we are destined to live in interesting times next year. One thing I have been stressing to my family and friends concerns focus. When we focus on what we don't want, it gives that our attention. Even if you think there is nothing special about attention, you must admit that this takes time away from thinking about, or giving attention to what we do want. I appreciate the importance of knowing what my enemies are up to, and understanding the perils that plague us, but once that is accomplished, what good is it to dwell on these things? We can lose our precious time, and find ourselves dispirited when we focus too much on futures that are violent or dismal. We do have a chance to reverse our trajectory, climate wise, and human rights wise, if we plant our flag in 2012 and tell them we WILL give our lives to protect our planet for our children. But to pull it off, I do believe that we must be envisioning our better future the whole time. Can we envision our political criminals being arrested by a cadre of law enforcement officials who decided to take their oaths of office to heart? Can we envision a new way of producing food that defeats giant agribusiness by starving them of income? Can we envision new transportation that does not emit, but instead cleans greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere? Can we dwell on health care coops that are nonprofit providers? There are other visions I could suggest, but I'm out of characters. Your visions, please?
 
 
+4 # Lowflyin Lolana 2012-01-05 22:48
We can only envision things collectively if we shake free of the crap (ideas, thoughts, provocations) that blasts at us nonstop from the establishment info-pushers.

All this time spent reacting to them is what's killing us. Enough of us need to turn off those voices and think....togeth er, in person.

That's what Occupy's doing and I suggest we all get on it.
 
 
+3 # Uppity Woman 2012-01-06 17:02
Thanks for the reply, Lolana. I quite agree. Too much advertising, too much fake news, it is all very distracting. The time spent reacting is just giving them our focus as well. I think this year we will begin to really listen to each other and think together, as you put it. We can and will begin to change this mess, this year, and that is what I'm envisioning most!

The Occupy movement will be a huge catalyst in this endeavor, but it is up to each of us to develop a positive vision we can bring to those discussions. I agree that we may have to turn off the infotainment pushers to find the quiet courage we will need to articulate and make our best visions our reality.
 
 
+2 # rosestillarose 2012-01-06 23:20
I'm with Uppity Woman!
 
 
+2 # mwd870 2012-01-05 10:20
Voices like Naomi Wolf remind us why we need to fight the good fight.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN