|
by Arthur Gilroy
This was originally written as a reply to Booman's fine recent post, What Are We Trying to Do?
I too am trying to figure out what we are trying to do here in West Left Blogistan, and have some further thoughts about what he said in that post. The reply grew (as is often the case with me), and I now present it as a stand-alone post. Read on if you so desire.
Booman...you have a fine analytical mind.
Right on point.
At root, we are trying to challenge the broader foreign policy consensus in Washington. We're trying to challenge the anti-universal health care consensus. We're trying to tear down some of the myths that sustain an imperial foreign policy and a top-down domestic policy. To do that we have to constantly challenge the Democrats not to use tired talking points that reinforce those myths about our nation and about the left. We have to challenge Democrats like Joe Lieberman and Ellen Tauscher that use right-wing memes and support anti-progressive policies. The idea is to take over one of the two major political parties, rather than start a new one. And:
To summarize: goal one was to elect a Democratic congress. Goal two is to turn the Democratic Party into a progressive party. That means primaries. That means changing what is considered as the political fringe...which means changing the political center. The fight against Republicans required a lot of Democratic unity. But those days are over now. Now the battle is for the soul of the Democratic Party. And that means that it is the furthest thing from a waste of time to take on Ellen Tauscher and oppose Hillary Clinton. Anyone that doesn't get that does seem to be missing the point, or selling out. I personally am not sure that the Democratic Party CAN be changed. Too much money pulling the other way. But since there has arisen no other viable party (I think that Dean blew it, unfortunately. He made his decision to stay inside with the best of intentions...and a not inconsiderable amount of success so far...but we will not see the real results of that decision until a few years have passed.), the Dems are the only shot that we have to challenge "the broader foreign policy consensus in Washington. ..the anti-universal health care consensus...[and] some of the myths that sustain an imperial foreign policy and a top-down domestic policy." But...given that strategic choice, tactically you are absolutely right. Let us pray. And then...let us work. You also write:
Number one on the list is the media. It was the rise of right-wing media, think-tanks, and the media consolidation in the 1990's that gave rise to Bushism. Blogs are a partial corrective for this. We provide a skeptical commentary on the media and reach an increasing number of Americans. The media is not the only culprit in the rise of Bushism. Another problem has been the unexamined assumptions of American foreign policy. Again...right on the money. Only thing? As I tried to illustrate in my last post (Bread and Circuses. Media. Its name Is Legion. Some Chomsky As Well.) and as Noam Chomsky has SO well described in so many of his pieces, "the media" is the REASON that so many assumptions in American policies of ALL types are so often unexamined in terms of the broad, voting public. For example (From that post linked above, quoting a Chomsky interview. Emphasis mine.):
Shank: But why haven't we turned our sights more toward Venezuela? Chomsky: Oh they're there. There's a constant stream of abuse and attack by the government and therefore the media, who are almost reflexively against Venezuela. For several reasons. Venezuela is independent. It's diversifying its exports to a limited extent, instead of just being dependent on exports to the United States. And it's initiating moves toward Latin American integration and independence. It's what they call a Bolivarian alternative and the United States doesn't like any of that. This again is defiance of U.S. policies going back to the Monroe Doctrine. There's now a standard interpretation of this trend in Latin America, another kind of party line. Latin America is all moving to the left, from Venezuela to Argentina with rare exceptions, but there's a good left and a bad left. The good left is Garcia and Lula, and then there's the bad left which is Chavez, Morales, maybe Correa. And that's the split. In order to maintain that position, it's necessary to resort to some fancy footwork. For example, it's necessary not to report the fact that when Lula was re-elected in October, his foreign trip and one of his first acts was to visit Caracas to support Chavez and his electoral campaign and to dedicate a joint Venezuelan-Brazilian project on the Orinoco River, to talk about new projects and so on. It's necessary not to report the fact that a couple of weeks later in Cochabamba, Bolivia, which is the heart of the bad guys, there was a meeting of all South American leaders. There had been bad blood between Chavez and Garcia, but it was apparently patched up. They laid plans for pretty constructive South American integration, but that just doesn't fit the U.S. agenda. So it wasn't reported. ---snip--- You can't mention Hezbollah in the U.S. media without putting in the context of "Iranian-supported Hezbollah." That's its name. Its name is Iranian-supported Hezbollah. It gets Iranian support. But you can mention Israel without saying US-supported Israel. So this is more tacit propaganda. The idea that Hezbollah is acting as an agent of Iran is very dubious. It's not accepted by specialists on Iran or specialists on Hezbollah. But it's the party line. Or sometimes you can put in Syria, i.e. "Syrian-supported Hezbollah," but since Syria is of less interest now you have to emphasize Iranian support. The media IS Job One. Without that job being accomplished to some degree ...a concerted attack on media lying and spin, both from the point of blog truth-telling AND by some sort of NEWSTRIKE!!!-like boycott...then all we will get is Plan A Lite, DemocRatpublicans in power instead of simple Ratpubs. Which might perhaps be WORSE, because there goes another 5 or 6 years before the voting public begins to awaken from its most recent hypnotically induced trance state. However...,take the swinging pocket watch or rotating spiral OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE HYPNOTISTS...take their tools away or at least make them less effective...and then you have a shot. A shot at awakening enough people to have a real effect on electoral politics. I said it several years ago when I first entered the blog lists, spear in hand, and I continue to say it now despite very little practical success at assembling some sort of organization or real power. OPPOSITION TO THE CORPORATE MEDIA IS JOB ONE!!! THERE is where the key to this whole puzzle lies. Again... Let us pray. And then let us get to work. Peace... AG P.S. The sideline stuff? Suffering, meta-bullshit, co-opting on the level of dKos? FUGGEDABOUDIT!!! Casualties of war. Deserters. Shell shock. The results of enemy infiltration. This is a WAR. Incidental losses are going to happen. But...
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old. The old man was right. As above, so below. This IS war, and the adversaries are the same as they were then. It is just being fought on a different level. As Churchill also said:
The truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it, ignorance my deride it, but in the end, there it is. Yup. Or, as another great Englishman once said:
If you get to it...and you can't DO it...there you jolly well are, aren't you. (Lord Buckley, the founder of contemporary socio-political comedy to whom all political comedians from Lenny Bruce right through Lewis Black and Margaret Cho owe their whole schtick.) Have fun... AG
The Incontrovertible Truth. In the End, There It Is. (Churchill) | 3 comments (3 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
The Incontrovertible Truth. In the End, There It Is. (Churchill) | 3 comments (3 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
|
Login
We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris
|
||||||||||
Booman Tribune Homepage admin@boomantribune.com powered by Scoop 
More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.
|
||||||||||||
