RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Why Are Some Liberals Bashing Sanders in Favor of Clinton? Print
Friday, 22 January 2016 15:26

Kolhatkar writes: "The recent snowball of unfounded and baseless criticism aimed at Sanders from liberal writers is disingenuous at best, and nefarious at worst."

Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. (photo: Getty)
Senator Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. (photo: Getty)


Why Are Some Liberals Bashing Sanders in Favor of Clinton?

By Sonali Kolhatkar, teleSUR

22 January 16

 

From Paul Krugman to Ta-Nehisi Coates, a panicked slew of anti-Sanders criticism is emerging leaving Clinton off the hook just in time for the primaries.

ith less than two weeks to go before the Iowa caucus, a collective panic seems to have set in with prominent liberal thinkers and writers over the prospect of Bernie Sanders actually winning the Democratic nomination for president.

Many have responded with farfetched and hypocritical arguments to drive away voters. The fear is mounting that a repeat of 2008 may be unfolding, just as when a junior Senator from Illinois roared ahead of Hillary Clinton at the start of that primary season and went on to win the nomination and presidency.

Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize winning economist and New York Times writer, who one might imagine would support an ardent critic of big banks like Sanders, penned a horribly titled op-ed, Weakened at Bernie's on Jan. 19. Starting with an obligatory denunciation of Clinton (she "is no paragon of political virtue") in order to cement his progressive credentials, he went on to label Sanders's positions on the economy and health care as "disturbing." After critiquing the senator for having an "unrealistic" outlook on the economy, Krugman then contradicted himself, going on to write that Sanders doesn't go far enough in calling for a restoration of the Glass-Steagasl Act without addressing the shadow banking system. Nowhere in the article does Krugman criticize Clinton's economic plan, which seems to focus simply on raising wages but leaving Wall Street's power intact. Krugman has taken aim at Sanders for not going far enough, but seemingly let Clinton off the hook despite her program not being as radical as Sanders (or as Krugman himself) has recommended.

New York Magazine's Jonathan Chait went one step further in his Jan. 18 piece with a title that left little room for interpretation: The Case Against Bernie Sanders. In it Chait, like Krugman, struggles to make a solid case. He relies instead on vague pronouncements like, "Sanders offers the left-wing version of a hoary political fantasy." His clearest argument is that Sanders' "self-identification as a socialist poses an enormous obstacle, as Americans respond to 'socialism' with overwhelming negativity." But the poll numbers leading into the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary, and the record-breaking crowds Sanders has attracted at his events, clearly suggest otherwise. How to explain the tens of thousands of people streaming to see him speak, and that he "now has more individual donors than any other candidate in history?" Either his supporters and donors are self-described socialists or they don't care that he is. Either way, the "socialist" label is not hurting Sanders in the primary.

Chait's most convincing argument against Sanders is on foreign policy, saying that he has "difficulty addressing issues outside his economic populism wheelhouse." And while that is indeed true, a choice between Clinton and Sanders is a choice between a candidate with little experience in foreign policy, and a liberal Democrat who has proven her hawkish credentials. Sanders has criticized the size of the military budget, while Clinton has boasted of her friendship with Henry Kissinger, a man many consider a war criminal. Progressives can decide which they prefer. Frankly neither candidate has a particularly promising foreign policy agenda.

Another prominent liberal, Jessica Valenti, added her voice to the anti-Sanders cacophony in the Guardian, "Hillary Clinton supporters: it is OK to care about gender on the ballot." In it she accused Sanders's supporters of spewing "an extraordinary amount of scorn" against the idea that women might want to vote for Clinton because she is female, adding later that, "One could argue that, gender aside, Clinton’s policies are better for women than Sanders’." Valenti argued that voting for Clinton might help women stave off the "horrifying consequences that anti-abortion Republican leadership would surely pursue." But she doesn't contrast any of Clinton's pro-women policies or achievements with Sanders'. As we have found out over the past 8 years, having an African-American holding the nation's highest office has hardly brought justice for the Black community. Simply having Clinton as president is unlikely to improve women's lot unless she works hard to make women's rights a serious priority. So far we don't know that she will.

Perhaps the most hard to bear anti-Sanders critique has come from the hugely acclaimed Atlantic writer and MacArthur genius Ta-Nehisi Coates, a man who has been likened to this generation's James Baldwin and whose 2014 article "The Case for Reparations," catapulted him to fame. On Jan. 19, Coates wrote the sharply critical piece, "Why Precisely Is Bernie Sanders Against Reparations?" in which he quotes Sanders' desire to invest deeply in the African-American community and address poverty and unemployment rather than pay reparations. A cursory search reveals Clinton's response to reparations that also does not endorse reparations and instead calls for "programs and policies that have helped generations of African-Americans have a better life in this country [to] continue." Sanders wants to increase investments, while Clinton wants to continue current policies. Instead of comparing both leading Democratic candidates' positions on reparations and excoriating both for refusing to endorse them, Coates makes a blatantly one-sided attack. His argument that Sanders's class-based critique of racism being problematic is sound. But again, there is no comparison with Clinton.

I am not one to declare that I "feel the Bern." I don't generally like to get behind any presidential candidate, preferring instead to champion progressive causes that candidates need to get behind. Still, the snowball of unfounded and baseless criticism aimed at Sanders from liberal writers is disingenuous at best, and nefarious at worst.

What we need are strong and fair critiques from the left of both Sanders and Clinton. Only then will the best and most progressive candidate become apparent.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: The Genius of Huey P. Newton Print
Friday, 22 January 2016 12:45

Abu-Jamal writes: "To those of us who were alive - and sentient, the name Huey P. Newton evokes an era of mass resistance, of Black popular protest and of the rise of revolutionary organizations across the land. To those of subsequent eras, youth in their 20s, the name is largely unknown."

Mumia Abu-Jamal. (photo: Prison Radio)
Mumia Abu-Jamal. (photo: Prison Radio)


The Genius of Huey P. Newton

By Mumia Abu-Jamal, CounterPunch

22 January 16

 

o those of us who were alive–and sentient, the name Huey P. Newton evokes an era of mass resistance, of Black popular protest and of the rise of revolutionary organizations across the land.

To those of subsequent eras, youth in their 20s, the name is largely unknown, as is the name of its greatest creation: The Black Panther Party.

To those of us now known as ‘old heads’ and elders, such a transition from then to now seems almost unimaginable, but alas, looking out into the present is proof positive that the old saying, “History is written by the victors” has more than a grain of truth to it.

History, it seems, is many things, but kind to the oppressed, it is not.

It never has been.

It is up to the oppressed, of every generation, to plumb the depths of history, and to excavate the ore of understanding, to teach us, not what happened yesterday, but to teach us why today is like it is, so that we may learn ideas to change it.

For history belongs not so much to those who have lived it, but more so to those who have inherited it.

It is in that spirit that we examine the life of Huey P. Newton.

Huey Percy Newton was born in Louisiana in 1942, named for the populist LA Governor, Huey Pierce Long (1893-1935); know in the state as “The Kingfish”.

Like many Blacks in California, Huey would carry the rhythms of the South in his speech, and when nervous, it would rise to a disconcerting twang. Perhaps this accounted for his self-consciousness, his wariness of speaking in public.

His family, like tens of thousands of others, formed the last legs of the Great Migration, of Black flight from the Apartheid South to the North and the West.

He would enter the streets of Oakland, a slender, short, beautiful boy, and the prospect terrified him. For while his father thought the name Huey was a respectful tribute to a gifted politician, to the hard, urban streets of Oakland, it was an invitation to an ass-whipping.

A scared boy does what’s been done since the dawn of human time. He tells an older brother. Walter schooled him to attack the biggest guy in the pack, and how to prevail. Keyed by his fear, Huey would follow these directions explicitly.

He would throw his fear of the biggest guy in the bunch, in the form of his fists, for big brother Walter taught him that the biggest guy often had the biggest fear–bigger that his own. He also learned that the best defense was often a stiff offense.

The English poet, William Wordsworth (1770- 1850) wrote, “The child is father of the man.” Lessons learned in beardless youth became the matrix of the man he became.

In describing his thinking at the time, Elaine Brown, his lover and political comrade, quoted him as saying:

Every blood on that street was a potential threat, unless I knew he was a friend. After my first fights though, I recognized that they bled like me . . . by the time I became a teenager, I was challenging the first fool that looked at me wrong, and walking around with an ice pick in a paper bag. (Brown 252)

As a direct consequence of these street battles, the young Newton boy earns a rather unflattering nickname: “Crazy Huey.” One can almost hear this Greek chorus, whispered with a mix of fear and fascination: ‘Who that boy?’ “Who you talkin’ bout?” “That pretty boy, right there!” “Oh–don’t mess with him–that’s Crazy Huey.”

Thus, from his earliest youth, until adulthood, Newton was in a war footing. How could this not mold the man?

He was also a petty thief who took, to say the least, an unusual path to perfect his craft. To succeed as a thief, Newton studied the California crimes code! He would later write:

I first studied law to become a better burglar. Figuring I might get busted at any time and wanting to be ready when it happened, I bought some books on criminal law and burglary and felony and looked up as much as possible. I tried to find out what kind of evidence they needed, what things were actually considered violations of the law, what the loopholes were, and what you could do to avoid being charged at all. They had a law for everything. I studied the California Penal Code and books like California Criminal Evidence and California criminal Law by Frick and Alarcon, concentrating on those areas that were somewhat vague (Newton 25)

Newton sought such vague laws because they could more easily be overturned as void for vagueness.

Such street and legal study experiences would prove valuable in the years to come, for this was the early to middle ‘60s, a time of emergent and roiling social discontent and upheaval.

Rosa Parks and Rev. Martin L. King were names known in Black communities nationwide. Black students kicked off 1960 by sit-ins at lunch counters in the South that evoked ugly white violence. Before the year was out, over 70,000 students were engaged in sit-ins, black and white. By 1961, “Freedom Rides” rolled through Southern states in protest to racial segregation, resulting in vicious violence by white racist groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

By 1963, four Black girls were bombed in a Baptist church, in Birmingham (called ‘Bombingham’), Alabama. Soon, white and black civil rights workers would be murdered in Mississippi.

As these events happened, a new invention called television carried these images into millions of Black homes across America.

It especially rankled Blacks in the North, for most could remember Southern childhoods, and they knew–knew, in their bones, that, but for a chance bus ride North, or West, it could be them, their baby sister, their brothers or fathers who would’ve been brutalized, bombed or shot by the  racists.

The Watts Riots tore across the Southern California area on a hot night in August 1965, the result of police mistreatment of Black drivers. For 5 nights, the ghetto burned.

The petty crimes of Newton seemed petty indeed against such a backdrop of violence and terror, and the little guy who once looked at “bloods” on the street as threats, began focusing on new threats–armed men–armed white men, clad in blue.

Cops, white cops, sneering cops. Domineering cops. Cops hired from the American South.

They rode through Oakland like gangsters in blue, harassing Blacks at will.

These forces converged to energize and radicalize Black youth throughout the community, among the two Black students at a junior college in town. Two alumni of Merritt Jr College, having read the speeches of Malcolm X and the essays of Frantz Fanon (in The Wretched of the Earth), met to build a new, radical–indeed revolutionary–organization.

Huey P. Newton and Bobby G. Seale would found the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.

From October 1st to the 15th, both men would pen the organizations 10-point program and platform. Newton was 24 years old, Seal was 30. (This was 1966)

The men hit the streets, organizing and a revolutionary movement was born.

It was pitched to Black youth, especially ghetto youth, and they joined, and the organization grew. Young men and women would join, and perhaps for the first time in their lives, study–not for a grade–but to learn about revolutionary ideas from struggles around the word: China, Cuba, Algeria, South Africa, Vietnam–and beyond.

The BPP (it would later drop the ‘self-defense’ reference) would grow from its base of Oakland, and expand to Richmond, and Los Angeles–and Seattle, Washington.

But events occurring roughly a year after its founding would catapult the organization, in effect, hydroplaning it, nationwide, exploding it, sending it into over 40 cities across America.

A hot summer evening in 1967, and a car stop by the Oakland police, would result in Huey being charged with murder, two cops shot, and Huey sent to hospital with a gunshot wound to his abdomen; it gave birth to the Free Huey Movement, and by so doing, changed the Party’s trajectory, from a small, regional group to a national one.

Offices opened in Boston, in Baton Rouge, in Philadelphia, in Chicago, Harlem, the Bronx, Winston-Salem, Omaha, Baltimore, Detroit, Jersey city, Kansas City, San Diego, and more. Where there were Black communities, there were Black militants, most moved by the masterful oratory and martyrdom of Malcolm X. These young brothers and sisters, mostly teenagers, formed the bulk of Black Panther membership.

All of these brothers and sisters, thousands, across the nation, joined, in some degree, because of their admiration, respect, and for some, veneration of the Minister of Defense.

Most, too, did not know him. They never met him. They read of him, and fell in love; some with him; some with his amazing vision: a Black Panther Party.

Because Newton was complex, so was his creation; it changed, constantly, as he changed and developed. From a Malcolmite, nationalist organization, to a revolutionary nationalist, to a revolutionary internationalist, to socialist, to Maoist, to what Newton termed an Inter-communalist.

This was Newton’s theoretical construct; that, nations were but illusions, assemblies of flags, for in the presence of a global imperial power (such as the U.S); nations were, at best, communities.

He believed that U.S economic power shattered sovereignties, for those who controlled foreign economies, actually controlled those states; the rest is subterfuge (Newton 169-170)

In 1972, Newton, using intercommunalist theory, predicted the fall of the Soviet Union. 1972.

While traditional Marxists ridiculed Newton’s ideas, the Soviet Union shuttered its doors on Dec. 26, 1991, two years after Newton’s ignoble death on a street corner by a crack dealer.

Complex, brilliant, self-taught, a Ph.D., fearless, full of fear, crazy, drug fiend, beautiful, mad–perhaps all of these epithets could, at times, describe the founder of the Black Panther Party.

If Panthers could’ve worshiped him less, and loved him more, perhaps he could’ve survived; perhaps the Party would’ve survived. Perhaps.

A memory, if you will.

The place? Death Row, PA Ca. 1996

Your speaker is in discussion with acclaimed womanist writer, Alice Walker. We are lamenting the passing of Huey. “He should’ve been at a Black college, teaching a new generation of activist”, I say.

“Are you kidding me?” she asks.

“Whaddayu mean?”

“You have no idea of the politics in academia. They’d do anything to run him out!”

“Run him out? Why? I’d think he’d be the most popular professor on campus? Why do you think they’d run him out?”

“You ain’t seen nothin’ til you’ve seen the politics in academia!”

Perhaps. But this was not to be.

Yet, who could deny Newton’s brilliance, which is all the more remarkable because up until he entered 10th grade, he was all but illiterate?

Huey tells an arresting tale of how his secret was uncovered. Like younger brothers, he looked up to his older brother, Melvin. And like most illiterates, he developed an extraordinary memory.

When Melvin came home one day, he saw Huey reciting from one of his books. At first impressed, he turned and stunned the youth by declaring him illiterate.

How had he known? The book held in Huey’s hands was upside-down.

Huey, shamed, essentially taught himself to read using the power of his will. He therefore read slowly, but deeply, draining each word of its significance (Abu-Jamal 3-5).

Oddly enough, this may have proven an advantage of Newton’s over-traditional readers, who learn their basics in kindergarten or first, second grades.

How so? Illiterates, as we’ve suggested, devote a significant amount of mental energy to memorize important data, especially to avoid the shame of discovery. This is no mean feat. One must by sheer necessity, develop a way of knowing that is based on hearing and retaining data that early writers and readers never actualize.

Moreover, illiterates must develop original ways of seeing and interpreting and categorizing the world. For unlike your literate colleagues, you are unable to relay and store data on a page; you must store data on your internal mental template–and then develop the machinery for retrieval.

Such a person seems, in a sense, a freer thinker, able to question, make sense of, and define the world in one’s own way.

And all of this must be done under the constant psychological stress and presence of discovery, which evokes shame.

This may account for Huey’s intensity, and his constant inability to speak before large audiences, which must have seemed unbearable.

By the same token, once it was discovered that Huey was illiterate, he used considerable mental energy to learn, to essentially teach himself that hidden art. Such a process must have released enormous forces that could now be devoted to belated learning, cognition and retention.

Co-founder Bobby Seale wrote that Newton read the book, The Wretched of the Earth by revolutionary psychiatrist, Frantz Fanon, some 6 times (Seale 25). This text, translated from Fanon’s native French, is a difficult work for any reader. One thinks it deeply informed Newton on concepts of decolonization, anti-imperialism, Arab independence movements, torture and its resultant traumas, both upon the tortured and the torturer.

It also was a primer on revolutionary violence–how the oppressed must confront the oppressor.

How could these ideas not prove definitive in the founding and formation of the Black Panther Party? The concept of Black America as a colony and White America as the Mother Country can be explained by Fanon’s ideas of the colonial struggle against the oppressive, exploitative European imperial powers.

The book, The Wretched of the Earth, so influential to the Party’s founders, became required reading for members, and was often discussed in PE classes. As it was written by a Black man actively engaged in a North African revolutionary endeavor, it took on an added sheen and influence.

Indeed, Fanon’s masterwork was so highly regarded in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s that it was called ‘The Handbook of the Black Revolution’.

Huey’s Mind

Newton’s mind seemed never to rest, for he read a wide range of literature to answer questions of existence. He found the writings of German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844-1900), especially his The Will to Power and Beyond Good and Evil, especially influential.

While not citing him explicitly, as early as 1971, the 5th year of the Party’s existence, Nietzsche’s influence can be seen in Newton’s article of 5 June, 1971, “Black capitalist” re-analyzed: He writes:

When we coined the expression “All power to the people”, we had in mind emphasizing the word “power” for we recognize that the will to power is the basic drive of man. But it is incorrect to seek power over people. We have been subjected to the dehumanizing power of exploitation and racism for hundreds of years; and the Black community has its will to power also. What we seek, however, is not power over people, but the power of control of our own destiny. (Newton 227)

It is hard to read such words without encountering Nietzsche whether he cites him or not, for the central theme is inescapable; “. . . the will to power is the basic drive of man.”

Newton was, at bottom, at a deep foundational level, a Nietzschean. Indeed, he was more Nietzschean than Marxist, for he often criticized Marxism as dogmatic. Marxism was a way; Nietzscheism was objective underlying the way: power.

Yet Nietzsche, unlike Fanon or Chairman Mao, was not required reading.

Elaine Brown writes that, at Huey’s behest, the Party established a school for party leadership to attempt to acquaint them with broad philosophical ideas:

Now they were wondering about his ideological institute. I saw the questions as the local leadership cadres came trooping to Oakland from as far away as Boston, Philadelphia, and Chicago for bi-monthly, two-day learning sessions led by Huey. Where was the stuff about the pigs, they seemed to ask, as we studied with not only Mao and Marx but Aristotle and Plato. Where was the stuff about urban guerrilla warfare? Their expressions conveyed, as Huey led us in discussions of the philosophies of Rousseau and Kant, [sic] Kierkegaard and Nietzsche, about existentialism and determinism and free will. I saw their faces when we examined and questioned the theories of capitalism and socialism and communism. Huey asking whether our systematic use of the tests of dialectical materialism meant anything. If, under a dialectical materialist analysis, nothing “stood outside” of the process, did that negate the process itself, he asked? (Brown 255-56)

Huey P. Newton was, by necessity, a man of action, but he was always also a man of ideas. He was so as an illiterate; he became more so when he began to read and added exponentially to his storehouse of ideas.

As a dialectical materialist, he knew that everything was in a state of flux; that change was the only constant. As a Nietzschean, he knew that only power could influence that change, and direct it along its desired course.

One needed the will to power.

Huey had no shortage of that quality.

When he went to prison, he knew every Panther in California, for he or Bobby had recruited him (or her). When he was freed on appeal in 1970, he emerged to a group that he neither knew, nor built. There were Panthers in Boston, Harlem, Philadelphia and Detroit.

He didn’t know these people, even if all of them were inspired by him. If you didn’t know someone, how could you trust him?

To add insult to injury, the FBI’s Cointelpro program had bogus letters sent to him, ostensibly from other Panthers, criticizing his rule, criticizing other Panthers and even threatening him.

Who were these people? he must have wondered.

So, using his mighty will, he shrunk the party, probably intending to rebuild it, in his Nietzschean image.

That was not to be.

He tried, with all his might, to change history.

But history is a cruel mistress. She loves, she caresses, and she moves on, creating new days, new possibilities, and new realities.

Dr. Huey P. Newton dared to struggle; and inspired millions to also fight against a twisted, broken, racist system. He built an organization that rattled the cages of oppressed and oppressor alike.

Then, like the true Nietzschean he was, he shattered it into a thousand pieces.

He lived. He rebelled. He inspired. He died.

But most of all, he rebelled.

That’s more than most of us can say.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
David Brooks Proposes a Kinder, Gentler Republican Party Print
Friday, 22 January 2016 09:29

Taibbi writes: "This is the author of aristocrat fan fiction classics like Bobos in Paradise suddenly advocating government policies to stimulate 'social mobility at the bottom.' Could this election season get any weirder?"

David Brooks. (photo: ABC NEWS)
David Brooks. (photo: ABC NEWS)


David Brooks Proposes a Kinder, Gentler Republican Party

By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone

22 January 16

 

A flip-flop for a saddened pundit

onely-hearts reactionary David Brooks, writing this week in the New York Times, describes the angst and despair of the old Republican leadership, as it watches the Trump/Cruz nativist revolution:

"Members of the Republican governing class are like cowering freshmen at halftime of a high school football game. Some are part of the Surrender Caucus, sitting sullenly on their stools resigned to the likelihood that their team is going to get crushed. Some are thinking of jumping ship to the Trump campaign… 

"Rarely has a party so passively accepted its own self-destruction."

Farther down in his piece, Brooks trumpets a call to action, wondering why his beloved party can't instantly rally voters to its cause the way just about everyone else seems able to these days:

"If MoveOn can organize, if the Tea Party can organize, if Justin Bieber can build a gigantic social media movement, why are you incapable of any collective action at all?

"What's needed is a grass-roots movement that stands for governing conservatism, built both online and through rallies, and gets behind a single candidate sometime in mid- to late February."

Brooks went on to timidly propose that that the party recognize that modern Republican voters are in a state of "trauma" and "want a government that will help the little guy."

He wondered if maybe the party leaders, in an effort to reverse their stunning fall from influence, might "actually provide concrete policy ideas to help the working class."

For most of the last four decades, the Republican Party worked pretty much exclusively for weenie aristocrats like Brooks, a tiny collection of entitled bosses whose idea of good government was income-tax cuts, deregulated workplaces and slackened obligations to the rabble.

To get what they wanted, they spent a generation whipping what Brooks calls "less-educated voters" into lathers over moronic controversies involving everything from Terri Schiavo's feeding tube to the New Black Panthers to the arrest of Kim Davis.

Those low-information voters never got Roe v. Wade repealed by their Republican leaders, never got zero-tolerance immigration policies (hell, Obama deported way more undocumented immigrants than Bush ever did), never got prayer in school or any of the other things they desperately wanted.

But they did get lower income taxes for David Brooks, a carried interest exemption for Mitt Romney, and a tax-repatriation holiday for Carly Fiorina's Hewlett-Packard and other mega-firms. None of these policies helped the bulk of the population much, but they were great for the 17 people they were actually designed to benefit.

For instance, the "less-educated voter" got less than jack for that 2004 tax repatriation holiday. In fact, the 15 biggest beneficiaries of the holiday laid off tens of thousands of jobs collectively after getting a big fat free pass from Uncle Sam.

The hilarious part about the Brooks column is the wounded, incredulous tone. Where, he asks, is the love? You know, like the old days, when the hick megachurcher and the Upper East Side Yalie were joined at the hip for the cause of a sharply-reduced top income tax rate!

"There's a silent majority of hopeful, practical, programmatic Republicans. You know who you are," Brooks bleats. "Please don't go quietly and pathetically into the night."

Back in the old days, when the Republican Party could count on the support of "less-educated voters" without having to actually give them anything, what we got all the time from people like Brooks were fatuous bromides about how anyone who was struggling lacked a work ethic and an appreciation of family structure. Government aid of any kind to help people out of economic hard times he always ripped as counterproductive and morally corrupting.

But now that he's being crapped on by a new movement of independent-minded, rebellious nativists who have no use for a moralizing, polysyllabic New Yorker like himself – now that he can hear the sharpening of the guillotines – suddenly Brooks is all in favor of government policies to help the "working class," a group of people he's presumably never met.

"Years ago," he writes, "reform conservatives were proposing a Sam's Club Republicanism, which would actually provide concrete policy ideas to help the working class, like wage subsidies, a higher earned-Income tax credit, increased child tax credits, subsidies for people who wanted to move in search of work."

He goes on: "This would be a conservatism that emphasized social mobility at the bottom, not cutting taxes at the top."

This is the author of aristocrat fan fiction classics like Bobos in Paradise suddenly advocating government policies to stimulate "social mobility at the bottom." Could this election season get any weirder?

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Seven Stages of Establishment Backlash: Corbyn/Sanders Edition Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=29455"><span class="small">Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept</span></a>   
Thursday, 21 January 2016 15:21

Greenwald writes: "Evidence of a growing Sanders movement is unmistakable. Because of the broader trends driving it, this is clearly unsettling to establishment Democrats - as it should be."

Glenn Greenwald. (photo: AP)
Glenn Greenwald. (photo: AP)


The Seven Stages of Establishment Backlash: Corbyn/Sanders Edition

By Glenn Greenwald, The Intercept

21 January 16

 

he British political and media establishment incrementally lost its collective mind over the election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the country’s Labour Party, and its unraveling and implosion show no signs of receding yet. Bernie Sanders is nowhere near as radical as Corbyn; they are not even in the same universe. But, especially on economic issues, Sanders is a more fundamental, systemic critic than the oligarchical power centers are willing to tolerate, and his rejection of corporate dominance over politics, and corporate support for his campaigns, is particularly menacing. He is thus regarded as America’s version of a far-left extremist, threatening establishment power.

For those who observed the unfolding of the British reaction to Corbyn’s victory, it’s been fascinating to watch the D.C./Democratic establishment’s reaction to Sanders’ emergence replicate that, reading from the same script. I personally think Clinton’s nomination is extremely likely, but evidence of a growing Sanders movement is unmistakable. Because of the broader trends driving it, this is clearly unsettling to establishment Democrats — as it should be.

A poll last week found that Sanders has a large lead with millennial voters, including young women; as Rolling Stone put it: “Young female voters support Bernie Sanders by an expansive margin.” The New York Times yesterday trumpeted that, in New Hampshire, Sanders “has jumped out to a 27 percentage point lead,” which is “stunning by New Hampshire standards.” The Wall Street Journal yesterday, in an editorial titled “Taking Sanders Seriously,” declared it is “no longer impossible to imagine the 74-year-old socialist as the Democratic nominee.”

Just as was true for Corbyn, there is a direct correlation between the strength of Sanders and the intensity of the bitter and ugly attacks unleashed at him by the D.C. and Democratic political and media establishment. There were, roughly speaking, seven stages to this establishment revolt in the U.K. against Corbyn, and the U.S. reaction to Sanders is closely following the same script:

STAGE 1: Polite condescension toward what is perceived to be harmless (we think it’s really wonderful that your views are being aired).

STAGE 2: Light, casual mockery as the self-belief among supporters grows (no, dears, a left-wing extremist will not win, but it’s nice to see you excited).

STAGE 3: Self-pity and angry etiquette lectures directed at supporters upon realization that they are not performing their duty of meek surrender, flavored with heavy doses of concern trolling (nobody but nobody is as rude and gauche online to journalists as these crusaders, and it’s unfortunately hurting their candidate’s cause!).

STAGE 4: Smear the candidate and his supporters with innuendos of sexism and racism by falsely claiming only white men support them (you like this candidate because he’s white and male like you, not because of ideology or policy or contempt for the party establishment’s corporatist, pro-war approach).

STAGE 5: Brazen invocation of right-wing attacks to marginalize and demonize, as polls prove the candidate is a credible threat (he’s weak on terrorism, will surrender to ISIS, has crazy associations, and is a clone of Mao and Stalin).

STAGE 6: Issuance of grave and hysterical warnings about the pending apocalypse if the establishment candidate is rejected, as the possibility of losing becomes imminent (you are destined for decades, perhaps even generations, of powerlessness if you disobey our decrees about who to select).

STAGE 7: Full-scale and unrestrained meltdown, panic, lashing-out, threats, recriminations, self-important foot-stomping, overt union with the Right, complete fury (I can no longer in good conscience support this party of misfits, terrorist-lovers, communists, and heathens).

Britain is well into Stage 7, and may even invent a whole new level (anonymous British military officials expressly threatened a “mutiny” if Corbyn were democratically elected as prime minister). The Democratic media and political establishment has been in the heart of Stage 5 for weeks and is now entering Stage 6. The arrival of Stage 7 is guaranteed if Sanders wins Iowa.

Headline covering Jeremy Corbyn. (photo: The Intercept)
Headline covering Jeremy Corbyn. (photo: The Intercept)

Headline from The Daily Beast. (photo: The Intercept)
Headline from The Daily Beast. (photo: The Intercept)

It’s both expected and legitimate in elections for the campaigns to harshly criticize one another. There’s nothing wrong with that; we should all want contrasts drawn, and it’s hardly surprising that this will be done with aggression and acrimony. People go to extremes to acquire power: That’s just human nature.

But that doesn’t mean one can’t find meaning in the specific attacks that are chosen, nor does it mean that the attacks invoked are immune from critique (the crass, cynical exploitation of gender issues by Clinton supporters to imply Sanders support is grounded in sexism was particularly slimy and dishonest given that the same left-wing factions that support Sanders spent months literally pleading with Elizabeth Warren to challenge Clinton, to say nothing of the large numbers of female Sanders supporters whose existence was nullified by those attacks).

People in both parties, and across the political spectrum, are disgusted by the bipartisan D.C. establishment. It’s hardly mysterious why large numbers of adults in the U.S. want to find an alternative to a candidate like Clinton who is drowning both politically and personally in Wall Street money, who seems unable to find a war she dislikes, and whose only political conviction seems to be that anything is justifiably said or done to secure her empowerment — just as it was hardly a mystery why adults in the U.K. were desperate to find an alternative to the craven, war-loving, left-hating Blairites who have enormous amounts of blood stained indelibly on their hands.

But the nature of “establishments” is that they cling desperately to power, and will attack anyone who defies or challenges that power with unrestrained fervor. That’s what we saw in the U.K. with the emergence of Corbyn, and what we’re seeing now with the threat posed by Sanders. It’s not surprising that the attacks in both cases are similar — the dynamic of establishment prerogative is the same — but it’s nonetheless striking how identical is the script used in both cases.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Modern-Day Slavery and Environmental Devastation Go Hand in Hand Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36376"><span class="small">Katie Herzog, Grist</span></a>   
Thursday, 21 January 2016 14:53

Herzog writes: "Slavery didn't end with the Emancipation Proclamation. Despite slavery being illegal in every country on the planet, there are more enslaved people alive today than at any point in history."

Many of the workers who toil in slavery are in industries, which lead to large environmental destruction. (photo: Shutterstock)
Many of the workers who toil in slavery are in industries, which lead to large environmental destruction. (photo: Shutterstock)


Modern-Day Slavery and Environmental Devastation Go Hand in Hand

By Katie Herzog, Grist

21 January 16

 

lavery didn’t end with the Emancipation Proclamation. Despite slavery being illegal in every country on the planet, there are more enslaved people alive today than at any point in history. From fishing boats in Thailand to private homes in New York to diamond mines in Congo to rock quarries in India, there are an estimated 30 million people working in bondage right now. That’s right — 30 million.

Modern slavery is the subject of Blood and Eartha new book by Kevin Bales, who cofounded Free the Slaves, an organization working to end slavery around the world. Bales spoke with Fresh Air’s Dave Davies, and he said that the devastation bondage causes isn’t limited to the lives of enslaved people themselves; it also has a devastating effect on both the planet and the climate. He said:

I was amazed to discover the role that slavery plays in CO2 emissions and in the simple and basic fact of how global warming takes place ….

When we calculated up, very conservatively, how much CO2 is coming from slavery, it worked out like this: That if slavery were a country it would have the population of Canada, but it would be the third-largest emitter of CO2 after China and the United States.

This is, in part, due to deforestation. Bales continued:

I can point to … the gigantic mangrove forests at the bottom of Bangladesh, India, Thailand, and Burma that’s called the Sundarbans forest, and it’s the largest carbon sink in Asia. In other words, [it’s] a place where carbon is taken out of the air and sequestered by the trees, both into the sea and into the trees themselves. So this is a very important forest for removing atmospheric carbon. This is also a place where slaveholders are using slaves to clear cut these mangrove forests, to put in shrimp farms, to put in rice paddies, to burn the wood, to do a lot of different things with it. But it’s almost all slave-based deforestation.

So what’s the consumer to do? How can we be sure the shrimp on our plates and the phones in our pockets aren’t the product of slave labor? Unfortunately, Bales says, there’s a lack of information out there for even informed consumers:

At the moment, if we were only able to use just the minerals or just the foodstuffs or materials that we know are absolutely clean, we would all be sort of short on cellphones and clothes and food, because a lot of it is still rather murky. I spend some time in the book walking through the supply chain that leads to our cellphones and our laptops and trying to point to who are the criminals and who are the accomplices and who are the people who are deeply and certainly responsible, and at what level that responsibility lies.

Of course, the ultimate responsibility on the ultimate end of the supply chain rests with us. And we’re responsible for what we buy and what we use, but we’re not as responsible as the people who sell it to us, and we’re certainly not as responsible as the people who make the phones, because this is their business, they should be clean about what they do.

Big business, however, isn’t exactly known for its transparency — or its responsibility. Besides, it’s not like there’s a label for “slavery-free,” like there is for free-range or organic. Even retailers like Whole Foods that advertise their commitment to social and environmental justice have been accused of selling food processed by enslaved people. But there are some things you can do, Bales says, like talking to the managers of the stores you frequent, looking at where your investments are, and getting involved with anti-slavery organizations. These may seem like small steps, but there are 30 million people — and one giant planet — that need you.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 Next > End >>

Page 2175 of 3432

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