I am really annoyed at the beatification of AOC
AOC = Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I deeply resent the coverage which pretends that it is she who invented the Green New Deal, that is it she who first touted higher taxes on the rich.
The flea-circus faux socialist website, Jacobin, has not one, but two articles today fawning over the completely phony AOC. I call her completely phony because she went out of her way to praise John McCain, because the bartender meme is a complete fraud - she went to BU and interned for Teddy Kennedy. It seems that this callow thirty year old is being annointed by the fake left wing press (The Nation, Huff Post, Jacobin, etc.) as a genuine voice from the socialist left.
The two articles on Jacobin today are:
Hope and Dread in 2019, which places AOC's very existence as the very first of "13 points of hope". The second point of hope is the Green New Deal, which is portrayed as springing full-born from the brow of Zeus, I mean from the brow of AOC. Gag me with a spoon. The Green New Deal has been around for over a decade. The fawning over this phony woman is sickening.
The other article is This Is How We Do It. Its leadin paragraph is:
Mainstream politicians and media are losing their minds over Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. They're terrified of how her approach could transform American politics.
It sure looks like AOC is going to be the next sheepdog for the leftwing of the Democratic Party, and the obvious Hispanic Woman (pardon me for not using the IdPol "Latinex" word.) lightning rod of the nativist right(which, of course, guarantees her even more publicity). The mainstream media and the fake leftwing media are pulling out all the stops to put this "Obama in a dress" into the public's mind as the spokes-fraud for the "left". Her guaranteed-to-fail opposition to Nancy Pelosi stunt is tolerated by TPTB both because it couldn't possibly succeed and to give her more fake left cred.
The idea here is to "suck up all the oxygen" from anyone on the genuine left, and let this proven phony play sheepdog. I continue to be nauseated. Your mileage may vary.
Cue the obligatory defense of AOC by suckers.
Comments
Exactly
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
As far as I'm concerned, that is the biggest tell
we currently have.
The corporate media out the ringers for us daily.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Good grief
Why does it matter that AOC did not invent the Green New Deal or higher taxes on the rich?
She's the one who's talking about those things now. Among all the Dems in D.C., she seems to be the only one with enough cojones to speak forcefully and directly about the things that matter. She is bringing attention to the things we progressives say we want. She is shedding daylight on the corruption in Congress.
Remember that "orientation" meeting for the freshman representatives that she went to, that turned out to be a brainwashing initiation run by lobbyists? All the others just went along with it, keeping their heads down like lambs to the slaughter, afraid to make a fuss. What did AOC do? Tweeted about it, bringing it to the public's attention.
She's being criticized for not being polite, for not falling into line, for not waiting her turn. Why, she's even using social media to communicate directly with the public, rather than hiding out with the elites, like the rest of the Beltway politicians do.
She's not afraid to rock the boat. She's shaking things up. Good for her. A thousand times, good for her.
I don't worship Ocasio-Cortez. She's a politician, which means she's got an ego. As with all politicians, you've got to keep an eye on them. But this is what I appreciate about her: She is positioning herself on her own playing field.
That is exactly what we want, isn't it? That is something we can use to our benefit.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
She's the only one being given massive publicity
She is NOT the only one talking about this. The Green Party has been talking about a Green New Deal for a decade.
Wake up and smell the coffee. She is an IdPol creature being used to keep people from recognizing the political process is completely corrupt.
Do you really think its news to most Americans that lobbyists run Congress? Do you really think that letting someone being groomed as a sheepdog to "expose" such a thing is a big deal? TPTB aren't threatened by modest dissent like that. They like people to stay inside the boundaries. I'd be much more interested to find out if AOC has banned ALL lobbyists from talking to her, refused to take ANY of their campaign contributions.
For all practical purposes
For all practical purposes, AOC is the only politician in D.C., aside from Bernie, who is talking about these things in a way that is getting attention.
Do Americans "know" that politicians are corrupt? Do they "know" that D.C. is run by lobbyists? Sure, most people are aware of it to some extent.
But do they really "get" it? Do they realize the extent to which it is destroying our lives and the planet? Do they understand that the way things are at present is not how thing have always been, nor is it how the future must be? Are they aware of We the People's power to change things? Have they reached the point of desperation and anger sufficient to demand (create!) change?
The American citizenry is as thick as planks. They need to be hit upside the head with a 2x4 multiple times in order to get their attention. Then hit them with that same 2x4 to focus their attention for any length of time. Then hit with the facts multiple times in order for the facts to sink in.
The American people have been asleep for decades. The alarm clock is starting to ring. If it takes AOC's voice to be part of that alarm, so be it.
I voted for Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka in 2016. Would I prefer that the American people be enlightened enough to be capable of appreciating Dr. Stein? You bet.
But at present, they're not. We have to work with what we've got.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
You keep assuming the media isn't completely controlled
For the second time, these two aren't "getting" attention, the corporate media is bestowing attention upon them because it is part of the scripted farce called politics in this country.
Note that before Bernie caved to Hillary (that is, before they showed him the Bill Hicks movie), the media did their best to ignore, smear, and belittle Bernie. He only got corporate coverage after he agreed to kiss Hillary's ass.
Why does it matter that AOC did not invent the Green New Deal..
or higher taxes on the rich?
Because it means her media exposure is sucking the oxygen away from the genuine lefties who were there first. The corporate media is stealing good leftie ideas and handing them to someone who will either dilute them like Obama (Obamacare vs MFA) or simply fail and discredit those left ideas.
It matters because here "resume" is being pumped up by things she has no right to claim as her own.
What's more important?
What's more important:
Preserving the planet, making sure everyone has adequate healthcare, and establishing a society in which the wellbeing of all people is understood to be important?
Or
Making sure the right people get credit for those things?
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
False equivalence
You assume she really wants to help. I assume she is just a sheepdog.
So, she gets no pass from me until she actually accomplishes something other than publicizing herself.
These two assumptions,
are not mutually exclusive. It’s very difficult to see the situation clearly with stars in your eyes, and sheepdogs may actually believe in their own autonomy. In any event, any sheepdog that stops obeying its masters commands will be put down in short order. All I’m sure of at this point is that she’s still useful to those who hold the reins of power.
“ …and when we destroy nature, we diminish our capacity to sense the divine,and understand who God is, and what our own potential is and duties are as human beings.- RFK jr. 8/26/2024
She may well be sincere, and
It may be possible to pull her (and some other frosh) away from the dark side before it's too late. She may bail out of the donorcrats.
Whew, I keep oscillating between cynical despair and naive optimism. What a whirlwind.
Is this part of the gish gallop, to keep us off balance?
You know what they say about assuming?
You reinforce it by saying "my fear is". Progressives are indeed rushing to judgment for and against. We need to wait and see. You may be right, or you may be wrong. Either way, some good will come of her I hope.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
There's actually little danger in this judgement of AOC,
.
premature or not, at least as far as I'm concerned.
I have a larger commitment to the idea of revising my opinion when new evidence shows up. That's a really important principle, IMO; it limits the damage done by being wrong (which damage, in this case, is fairly minimal anyway: what difference does it make if we think Ocasio-Cortez is a sheepdog? What damage is done?).
If Ocasio-Cortez is a good leader for a progressive uprising (which is why we're all having this debate, right?) that will come out in her actions over time. At that point, I will re-evaluate all the evidence I have of whether she's a good leader or not.
However, we have had too many Wisconsins to give politicians, Democrats and Republicans particularly, the benefit of the doubt.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Because then they get a Nobel peace prize and
start killing women and children in seven countries? I don't know, just a guess.
Who are you referring to?
Who are you referring to?
We haven't yet had leaders who led us in actually doing the things I mentioned in my post:
"Preserving the planet, making sure everyone has adequate healthcare, and establishing a society in which the wellbeing of all people is understood to be important"
I have my share of cynicism, so I don't know for sure whether any of that will occur.
But I'm relatively certain that the mindset it will take for us to accomplish those things will not be the same mindset that goes around the globe, bombing and destroying and taking whatever it wants in whatever way it wants to.
I don't mean a pretense of achieving those things, the MIC/oligarchy pulling the wool over the people's eyes while continuing to vampirize us and the planet. I mean really getting those things done.
Maybe it's doable, maybe not. But in order to throw off rule by the sociopathic MIC/oligarchy, collective humanity will have to wake up. Once it's awakened, the collective mindset will not support the kind of behavior you're talking about.
That's not idealistic blather. That's applying basic logic.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
He's referring to Obama - duh!
Before anyone knew who he was, the left fell in a swoon at his feet. He was given a Nobel Peace prize before elected.
He proceeded to bomb seven countries, prosecute more whistleblowers than anyone, backed the military as it overthrew the government of Honduras.
-----
The point is that AOC has no track record, just like Obama. A lot of us lefties don't trust the corporate media narrative at all. So when they give AOC all this free publicity, it brings up bad memories.
Capiche?
Well,
I figured that he must be alluding to Obama. But in my comment, I did not mention Obama, or anyone similar to Obama. Obama did not, nor would he ever do, anything to advance the progressive goals I noted in my comment.
This was my comment in its entirety:
So no, I guess I don't "capiche" a reply about Obama bombing children.
I can understand that, but being stuck in bad memories can make it very difficult to be in the present.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
Swoon all over Obama....
Nothing ever changes with the left. Either they want a pony or they're sold hook, line, and sinker.
I see a lot of feelings and very little fact being expressed. Fear, suspicion, and distrust need to be there, but holy cow batman, it is only the "spidey senses" going off. We need to wait and see. AOC needs time to reveal herself. Obama did too, and he turned out to be exactly what my gut told he was. A liar going from one revival meeting to another to raise the spirits of the faithful while filling his big, big collection plate. If we are lucky, AOC will stay true to what she ran on even after they turn the cameras off. Either way, it won't be enough to change the path we are on. I just hope the floods hit the gated communities first.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Dk--are you really embracing the purity pony meme?
Do I sound (in these comments) like I'm reacting out of emotion? Or do I sound like I'm analyzing evidence? Do you actually think of me as being a spoiled kid who throws a tantrum if she doesn't get the exact dolly she wants? Because that's what the "they want a pony" meme trades on: the notion that we critics are to blame for our unrealistic expectations.
If my expectations are unrealistic, then challenge them specifically: in this case my expectation that a change agent will refuse to support the current Democratic leadership.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Frankly
your position makes no sense to me. What should AOC do? Refuse to give interviews? Should any progressive politician refuse to talk to corporate media? Just talk to Jimmy Dore? She's not the God of the left, but she is courageous and her heart is in the right place.
My position is quite sensible
I think AOC is being managed. I think her "story" is as big a "legend" as Obama - and she has even less a track record than he did prior to running for his Senate seat.
I think her statements are given wider coverage than a genuine leftist would get. I think building her up detracts from genuine leftists who have been around longer and done a whole lot more.
So, all your statements about "what should she do?" are premised on the idea that she is a genuine leftist. Until someone shows me more than highly publicized words, I am not buying that she is anything but a carefully groomed sheepdog.
Why are you so invested in this persona that has been invented by the media over the space of a few months? Has she ever done anything other than run for one office?
The corporate media does what it pleases. Talking to them or not talking to them does not change their agenda one iota. What I see is that the CM desires to elevate AOC, gives her free airtime on important shows. They don't do that to people they fear or disagree with. She is nobody. They could ignore her, instead they publicize her. That tells me their agenda.
Courageous? Every time the CM quote her, she gets more fame. Fame is coin of the realm for politicians. What is courageous about enriching herself? I know a lot of lefties who would kill for the kind of exposure she has handed to her on a platter.
Tell me, was "her heart in the right place" praising John McCain? That was unnecessary and not a leftish thing to do. Tell me how you felt about that.
Why are you so invested in a premature judgment?
You have zero facts and some things that trigger you. You can prove nothing, therefore you can definitively state nothing.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
If anything is premature, its her elevation
Wrong. I have plenty of facts, which you arbitrarily relabel as "some things that trigger you".
First, in politics, what people say is a large part of what they do. Ever heard the philosophical term "speech acts", popularized by John Searle? When people with power/authority/celebrity speak it carries more weight than you or I.
Now, on to some "speech (f)acts".
1. The infamous support for McCain:
2. Various statements AOC made immediately after winning the primary
3. Her recent glowing endorsement of and vote for Nancy Pelosi
4. Her strong support for Rashida Tlaib's low class, rabble rousing "Impeach the mother******".
ON EDIT:
5. Her completely reversing her stand on ICE:
END EDIT
Those are quite a few facts that are perfectly consistent with my picture of her as a pro-military, corporate creature who is there to further polarize politics while sucking the oxygen away from genuine leftists and distracting people from all the CIA Dems quietly getting to work selling us out.
Given all these red flags, I think the shoe is on the other foot. Why are you so invested in giving this woman a third, a fourth chance to hoodwink naive folks who want genuine progressives?
I agree.
To make her the next coming of Christ is stupid. They did it to Obama, you'd think they would have learned something.
You make good points. I am not about to rush in for or against. Obama's deceit was transparent to me. Her, I need to wait and see.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I agree with you,
,
about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and I praise and respect you for working so hard to make the point in this long discussion.
For me, the war issue is preeminent. Her statement about McCain is and was the end for me.
Not even John McCain would have said that he was, "an unparalleled example of human decency." It's a bold-faced lie. Or she's exceptionally ignorant.
You can't be for slaughtering innocent people and for saving the environment at the same time. If she doesn't understand the connection between planet killing and military industrial mayhem, she's a dunce. If she thinks getting fossil fuels out of campaign finance can happen while war rampages using our tax dollars, she's logic-impaired. She's a phony, and a lightweight, and a distraction.
I had to check into a clinic during McCain deranagement time
Thanks for reposting the picture of McCain with ISIS. There is another one of him with the Ukronazis.
The man was a nasty, murderous, arrogant, cruel, entitled son of a bitch. He deserves nothing more than the grave he is buried in.
With
Ukrainian Nazi Tyahnybok and friends.
Thanks for that. It needs to be see, however disgusting it is.
NO TEXT
Agreed 100%
I know a lot of people dismiss that but at the same time the media is trying to sell AOC as the next progressive “The One”, we really have nothing to go on except her words. So many seem so impressed by her words, but the quote you quoted doesn’t seem to matter. She didn’t have to say that. Hell, she didn’t need to say ANYTHING! But that was what she chose to say. Words matter, don’t they? I didn’t expect her speak negative of the guy, but that just felt laid on a little too thick for the newest progressive superstar.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Can't speak for arendt, but what I expect her to do
is refuse to vote the same leadership back into control of the Democrats in the House that's been there for the past 15 years.
As for the media, that has nothing to do with what Ocasio-Cortez does or doesn't do; the media's reactions to political figures, events, and policies provide a series of tells as to whether a figure is actually a change agent or not. This works because the corporate media is actually an enforcer for the elites, there to stamp out any threat to the prevailing order, whether it comes from a politician (Bernie) or from the grassroots (Standing Rock, Occupy, BLM).
Since that is the function of the media, and we all know it, their reactions to various political figures and movements can tell us a lot about whether or not those political figures and movements are actually a threat to the status quo.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Very good take on the media
Essentially, Americans with brains have to read the NYT/WaPo the way Soviets with brains read Pravda/Izvestia. We have to look at the emphasis given, not the facts. We have to see who is on the podium at the May Day parade. The corporate media is now as big a propaganda exercise as the Soviet media.
I am ashamed at what has happened to journalism in this country in my adult lifetime. It rips the heart out of me to see weasels and asskissers celebrated as lovers of "freedom" and protectors of our First Ammendment right to free speech.
I don't think we can use her to our benefit.
Voting for Pelosi because she's "the most progressive" politician on the ballot, regardless of all the, not conservative, but outright reactionary things she's done? Including taking impeachment of George W Bush off the table? That's the political methodology of the DLC.
If you want to be a change agent, you can't support the leadership that's had control for the last fifteen years or more.
If AOC is unwilling or unable to challenge the current Democratic Party leadership than how is she going to be of use to us?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I'm more than willing to change my mind
If I see any signs that she isn't using the political methodology she demonstrated in her vote for Pelosi.
Or if I see any signs that she is using her visibility to build an infrastructure that is truly distinct from that of the current Democratic leadership. In other words, she needs to push back against the current leadership, or she needs to take territory for the left. She's not going to get that territory from the big six media corps. They've made their position on American politics quite clear.
While I'm willing to allow for these possibilities, I don't see them as probable, mainly because of AOC's own actions. Further, it's hardly surprising if, after thirty years or so of the same political pattern being played out again and again, some people are tired of giving the next round of Democrats the benefit of the doubt.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Giving no politician the benefit of doubt
You've described my position exactly. After years of giving yet another politician coming onto the scene who is given a glowing narrative by the media the unearned benefit of the doubt I'm coming to this election purely from to a "Show Me" attitude. While I share no hard feelings towards others who inexplicably chose not to see the media narrative surrounding AOC as a blindingly obvious "TELL" it is tiresome hearing my unwillingness to point out why I've reached this point characterized as being "negative".
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Just so.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I disagree that she's fake.
She was actually a bartender. She did go to BU, which is not the finishing school for elitists that her detractors here are claiming it to be. She was a middle-class kid in a middle-class borough of NY.
I don't think she's the voice of the radical left, but that voice would not be given a second of airtime anyway.
She's a social democrat. Not some scary other. But also not a trap for those further to her left. Insofar as the media will allow any leftish thoughts to percolate out to the public, her telegenic and quick-witted nature will get those social-democratic ideas some exposure. It's better than we've been getting.
Is there over-exposure? Yup, she's the new thing. But it's better than the old thing (insert Joe Biden here).
The kind words about McCain? Pretty much boilerplate stuff that is said when it's deemed unsavory to trash him at his funeral. I wouldn't consider that the sign of a sheepdog.
Could she become a sheepdog? Sure, it's possible for anyone to do that, but that's something we can wait to see in a more developed form, when people are led to slaughter.
You are not going to see a truly radical re-envisioning of the American Way on your TV. There's too many people at the cut switch to allow that to happen. I don't think AOC is the agent for that censorship. I don't think she was foisted upon us to hide that censorship. I think she is doing what she deems best, from her social-democratic perspective and in any opportunity or circumstance that presents itself to her to make such a noise.
Breathlessly undercutting her, especially if it's done with innuendo or outright fabrications, is no better than breathlessly airing her every tweet as if it's the utterance of a saint.
I'd like it if we were permitted to hear more voices from the left. But we weren't before now, and we might not be now but for an appealing package it comes in. Remember, the media are all about package. We can see through that, to know hers is but one voice. One voice that I for one welcome for revealing that a lot more of us have similar (or more demanding) voices and ideas and priorities that have not been heard.
"Breathlessly undercutting her, especially if it's done
...with innuendo or outright fabrications."
I'm going to assume you are not accusing me of innuendo and fabrications.
No one said BU was a finishing school. BU is a $50,000/yr elite school. It is right up there with Harvard and MIT as a "name" school. I notice you left out "interning for Teddy Kennedy". That is another highly sought after elite credential. I'm not detracting from her credentials, I'm saying that "bartender" is "just plain folks" sheepdip baloney, just like Obama, "the community organizer".
Well we agree about that.
Quite frankly, its a little too late for the incremental, maybe in twenty years shtick. There is no time for "percolation". This country is going down the drain TODAY. We need serious pushback, not this polite pile of Kabuki. The economy is on the verge of cratering again, with the inflated stock market down 30%,the government in shutdown, and Trump running a trade war with China. Climate change is all but irreversible, but we should settle for our ideas "getting some exposure" in a corporate-approved fashion? I don't think so.
ON EDIT:
I also think her IdPol bona fides are going to simply increase the phony partisan split in this country. The Hannity crowd has already used her to demonize the left. We need people who are acceptable and friendly to the "deplorables", not another polarizing figure.
BTW, has she said anything seriously against our perpetual war foreign and domestic policy since she got elected?
END EDIT.
asdf
That's why I don't dwell on media coverage of AOC. I do other things I think will be more productive.
You make a good point
I should simply ignore the duopoly/media puppet show and work on projects that have a genuine impact, as opposed to getting involved in meaningless wastes of time like pushing back against the corporate media's fantasy world.
I'm not sure whether you're being sincere or snarky.
For me -- not pushing this on anyone else, it's just me -- I think we might try something other than throwing ourselves into quixotic battles where TPTB have the biggest concentrations of manpower and resources arrayed against us. I think we'll accomplish more by fighting TPTB where they aren't.
It was sincere. You made a good point. n/t
media's fantasy world
Media's fantasy world, indeed. Unfortunately, that's where Americans live, in their tvs and smartphones. Go anywhere in public and count the people who are NOT looking at a screen. I find myself fortunate to find a doctor's office without multiple flatscreens. It would be great to go Fahrenheit 451 and try to get people to take the Seashells out of their ears, but can we really see that happening? Only a massive, long power failure ala puerto rico would do it.
What's the alternative?
Can we judo the media and use their force against them? Doubtful, but damn, we should try. And as I pointed out above, the image of the dancing AOC is powerful. Yeah, she's had a moderately privileged life, enough to leave her feeling chipper, but can we do a tug of war for her soul? Maybe get her to leave the donorcrats once she has some, but not too much, experience?
Yeah, all of a sudden the "prog dems" are yelling green new deal, but I haven't heard the greens complaining too much; maybe they would be content to see the cause go forward. IF IT INDEED DOES.
postscript: I wonder how she'd feel about networking with Redneck Revolt?
redneckrevolt.org
"
Redneck Revolt was founded in 2016 as an anti-racist, anti-fascist community defense formation. The history of the term redneck is long and complex. One of the earliest recorded uses of the term comes from the 1890’s, and refers to rednecks as “poorer inhabitants of the rural districts…men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin burned red by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks”.
In 1921, the term became synonymous with armed insurrection against the state, as members of the United Mine Workers of America tied red bandanas around their necks during the Battle of Blair Mountain, a two week long armed multi-racial labor uprising in the coalfields of West Virginia.
"
"What's the alternative?"
I've been saying for a year that I agree with Chris Hedges: democracy in America is over. The oligarchs run this country. Politics and the media are nothing more than a psyop that bamboozles the populace. Foreign and domestic policy is bipartisan: more war, more private prisons, more tax breaks for the rich, less government programs for the 99%.
CH says the only viable alternative is to get in the streets and demonstrate. Case in point: Yellow Vests. Note that isn't happening here, because our militarized police are noted for their extreme brutality.
Its not a good answer, but its the only answer that I feel is honest.
Honesty's important, thank you
Getting people into the streets as a prolonged effort will require a mix of several things:
-a tremendous amount of organizing and propagandizing
-some symbol or idea to catch people's attention AND their fantasies.
Most people don't sit down and read Capital and decide to march. They see a police-murdered young man, or a valiant tribe, or imprisoned children. In France they had a straw that broke the camel's back, a concrete symbol (tax) that went right into their homes, but how well was it organized, for longevity? Like Occupy. People can't live on the barricades for long without a way to renew their emotion. And the Power has many techniques to take the wind out of the sail, from tanks and water cannons to infiltration, surveillance, and media manipulation. We need the emotion of a powerful symbol, with the backbone of strong organization, and able to resist the blandishments of kindly wisdom.
Robinson Jeffers, "Cassandra"
religion—
Vendors and political men
Pour from the barrel, new lies on the old, and are praised for kindly
Wisdom. Poor bitch be wise.
fair use.
We need to give the people a symbol, a myth, that will engage their passion, maybe a dancing Green Girl facing down The Bull (dancing with a sturdy redneck?), to counter the "kindly Wisdom". Real people as symbols show their clay feet too quickly. But we do have real symbols: Freddy Gray, the-still imprisoned Panthers, dead children. Tragic symbols for anger; beautiful symbols for hope. Notice I say symbols, not leaders. Leaders organize, and they can fail as humans do; symbols are timeless.
Did all of that happen to create yellow vest protests?
I thought it was a spontaneous uprising, driven by genuine anger and people just together thinking “enough!” and acting on it.
Perhaps I’ve got it wrong. I don’t know a lot about it, so I’m sincerely wondering this. I guess I feel that any movement started by money and messaging is doomed to fall flat.
My taxi cab driver in Paris
I was in Paris 18 moths ago. As is my style, I got our taxi cab driver to talk about politics in France. He was bitterly angry. He hated all current French politicians. He felt that France was being badly mismanaged and resented the extreme tax level, he claimed 70%. It is true that the French are the highest taxed people, more so than the Scandinavian countries now. Here's my point, the conditions for street protest existed before the Yellow Vests. I don't see that here in the US. Mostly because the MSM is fully controlled by corporate America and the CIA today. The people have been thoroughly screwed and only somewhat see this, with the exception of Middle America who voted for Trump, entirely an appropriation of anger without intelligent content. If someone would point out clearly that median income today is about the same as it was in 1970, corrected for inflation, while GDP has ballooned and the rich are now fabulously rich, then they might be motivated to protest.
In the 1960s and 70s we had demonstrations because we actually believed the lie that we ascribed to be a moral nation and that war and discrimination were clearly contrary to that. Today we go shopping at the mall (W was right) and listen to Rachel and get angry at Russia. Reread "1894". That's where we are going - imaginary enemies and total surveillance.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Wrapping a few replies
I can't say I know much about the Yellow Vests; for one thing, I haven't watched tv in ages. But from what I gather from reading The Wizard's post about his experiences in Paris, the conditions were ripe for an outbreak. And it sort of illustrates several of my points:
-a clear, bright symbol, which even indicates distress: the vests
-the ironic fact that the vests were required by law for auto safety; the people hijacked an artifact of the Power for their own purposes
Of course, it's different here, and yellow vests probably won't catch on (not in our mass consciousness), but just for the hell of it: Harbor Freight sells 'em for five bucks.
BTW, to The Wizard: " Today we go shopping at the mall". It boggles me that we actually have stores unironically called Banana Republic. Head spinning.
Pretty much how I see it too
Part of why I no longer watch mainstream television. I didn’t even know that “AOC” had appeared on 60 Minutes, until I read about it here.
So I haven’t been bothered too much by her celebrity. I was mildly annoyed when articles everywhere started saying “AOC’s Green New Deal.” Wtf..
I agree with you that she has already taken several concrete actions and made specific statements that show her plans. Saying she hasn’t done anything yet to form an opinion on isn’t true. I’m not sure what we are supposed to wait to see in the future.
But honestly i don’t feel like I need to look any closer at her. She has done enough to know she’s going to follow the same track as Bernie — always playing at the edges and looking like he’s outside, but still ultimately playing for the team. That is her job, now. Hers and others. Part of that is being on the tv, getting attention.
I don’t think it’s sucking up anything from real leftists because if it weren’t her it would be someone else, they won’t give that coverage to anyone you would like to see on there. That’s why I’ve turned it off. It works for me.
Interesting thread. Thanks for posting.
I think both of you are right
about priorities.
I mean, pushing back against the fantasy world matters. If it didn't, why are we talking here?
However, other things matter too. Pushback can't be the only thing one does.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Excellent comment
That summarizes my own thoughts on AOC. She may be a sheepdog or may become one, but it is too early to rush to judgment. She is the shiny new object who appears to not be afraid to express herself openly despite being a green freshman representative. If the media covers her and gives airing to those issues that many of us have wished to be aired, then it is a positive for now.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Same here. eom
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Yes, yours is the bottom line to the complaint she is sucking
the air out of the room. Pffffttt .
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
EXACTLY!
She is the one using her voice. You got somebody else? Where the fuck are they?
Where?
You made the same statement as Centaura...
You get the same answer.
using her voice is talking, where is she walking? /nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
I guess we'll find out.
She's been a member of Congress for less than a week.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
Controlled Opposition:
"Controlled Opposition is the term used to describe “leaders” who arrive on the scene (almost out of nowhere) and offer us amazing nuggets of truth. These “facts” either wow us (or confirm something we subconsciously knew, but wanted confirmation)."
Part of the strategy is to get things out in the open, let the rabble talk about things, not keep it bottled up. There has to be pacification and mollification of the masses, always, and there have always been dupes who have been used for that purpose.
As I remember saying the same things I said about Bernie about 3 years ago now, the problem is the democratic party. Ocasio-Cortez (I try not to use the term AOC because it celebritizes politicians imo, which is fucking sick imo). The getting the message out thing is overblown.
Good point
"I try not to use the term AOC because it celebritizes politicians imo, which is fucking sick imo"
I use abbrevs whenever possible, because my hands hurt. Her name's too long. Maybe we should call her Cortez?
Maybe it's childish, but I still like the idea of a dancing revolutionary. Symbols count. People don't generally think, they react, usually to symbols. Choose your symbols well.
Mind boggling isn't it?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Yeah, but its a "teachable moment"
I get to expose and rebut all the false assumptions and pollyanish baggage that people bring to this issue.
I’m not sure if 'Pollyanish'
is a beneficial state to be in, or one that accentuates unhealthy naivety. I do feel though, that whatever genuinely enhances a sense of wellbeing has the potential to ultimately and more gracefully manifest its reality. I think it’s the genuine part that makes a difference. It’s difficult these days to distill the genuine from the disingenuous. In some ways only time will tell, but if we sever the very human characteristic of fallibility due to a desire for purity, we also risk ending up with little.
I'm more than a little disturbed, and distressed
to see the "purity" talking point so alive and well on C99.
I thought we all came here to escape that kind of character attack.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It’s not new, CStMS
Not that this necessarily makes it any more ok, but it was many months ago, maybe longer, when i read a popular comment here one night (I don’t remember who actually wrote it, but with many thumbs-up signaling wide agreement, that doesn’t matter.) The discussion then was about Bernie, not Ocasio-Cortez, but it was the same conversation.
Those not embracing Bernie as “the best we’ve got” and get on board with his, um... movement, or plan, to reform the democrats were deemed purists who are never satisfied and wanting “rainbows and unicorns” (way more childish, demanding, and unrealistic than wanting a mere pony).
I felt like you, kind of shocked to see that. I did come here to get away from that kind of thing. That’s when I changed my avatar. Figured I’d go ahead embrace the label, why not. I do like rainbows, and unicorns.
JtC teaches tolerance. That’s not an easy lesson for me on some issues. But I’m trying to learn it. So instead of getting miffed, I just decided to have some fun with it. I’m happily in the rainbows, unicorns, and ponies club, those who want the impossible dream, and aren’t able or willing anymore to go with “the best we’ve got” if this is it. I understand some people really believe it’s foolish and childish to have that position or viewpoint. Some even call it “negative” — which is kinda funny, right?
I guess that's so, but it's more people than I'm used to
saying it, including some people I truly care about, who have known me, at least digitally, for years.
Do they really see me as a spoiled child? a fantasist? a meanie who "others" well-meaning politicians because she's not getting every last thing she wants? (The poor politicians, working so hard for me, and I'm never satisfied...)
People have no notion, none, of what me actually being a spoiled brat would look like: what it would actually look like if I were never satisfied till I got everything I wanted.The last time I encountered someone saying stuff like that to me, I changed from demanding single-payer/Medicare for All to demanding a nationalized health care system like the NHS in Britain. If I gotta do the time, I might as well do the crime. Maybe I should start demanding here that we all start building a movement of Catalonian left-wing anarchist cooperatives, instead of simply observing that if you vote for Nancy Pelosi you are unlikely to change the Democratic party.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think it has less to do with what people think about you
And more to do with people's inability to be uncomfortable. Politics as a vehicle for change is what we know. To eschew that would require some serious re-categorization of how to make the world safe from those who are trying to defile it. That's a mighty uncomfortable place to be in one's mind.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
That’s a good observation Zoebear
You’re better at this than I am. Kudos!
I read CStMS’s comment and related to her feelings, even though people here mostly don’t know me at all, so I take it less personally I think. But I also laughed and loved this part, thinking yes, that’s a great idea! Please do this!
I also think characterizing my view on politics
As "negative" is somewhat ironic. Maybe I could critique electoral politics without being called "negative" if I got up on my soapbox telling everyone how they can create value in their own neighborhoods and communities like I have with my own because I believe that is where our collective salvation will be when things begin to fall apart.
Truthfully though that inaccurate slant on my politics bothers me less than the term "purist" that is being thrown around. An accusation that is rooted in the same incrementalism through electoral politics I've seen employed at some other places and reeks of shaming those who refuse to rearrange the chairs on the Titanic.
Although I did enjoy the background story of your avatar
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
What a broadly and inclusive thread.
Thanks all.
I trust we'll ultimately transcend our differences
because we are generally open-minded, curious and have a heart.
I hope that too.
That's one reason I stick around.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
One more point: why do we hear crickets about the CIA dems?
Because all the media is over there on AOC, telling the story of how the Dems are moving left.
When the reality is that, with 20 new CIA Dems, the party is really moving to the right. How many CIA Dems voted not to confirm Pelosi? If the new Dem class was really leftish, Nancy would have been out.
Covering the powerless AOC hides the power of the CIA Dems.
yep, yep ...
right.
https://www.euronews.com/live
I must say
You KILLED this thread. Enjoyed reading all your answers to those defending this new uh "Obama in a dress" did you say?
Well done is better than well said-Ben Franklin
Slotkin is a CIA Dem in Michigan.....
She is refusing her pay and donating it to the Alzheimer's Foundation during the shutdown. Why isn't this being touted on MSM? Because they are a bunch of Vanderbilt, corporate @ssholes.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Interesting fact. Thanks.
Slotkin has pedigree, plus her Wiki bio does not make her out to be dripping with money (husband an army helicopter pilot), so forgoing salary seems a meaningful action on her part.
I can't unpack your "Vanderbilt" reference. Is that about Anderson Cooper (a Vanderbilt)?
Of course, it has been well publicized that AOC "couldn't afford" an apartment in DC. So how can anyone complain about her taking her salary in the shutdown.
Yes, Anderson Cooper and
Maddow at her 30K a show. They are so far removed from reality - all of them.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Not sure if you are clear - Cooper is LITERALLY a Vanderbilt
I don't think AOC is that powerful
in that she can discredit valid ideas. Single payer, perpetual war, wage terrorism weren't destroyed by Obama. If she is playing a game we'll know it soon enough. Obamas administration showed what it cared about, what it fought for and what it didn't fight for. Through that lens we judge democratic politicians today. So she's either a fighter for the ideas she says she believes in or she's a dupe or a young Pelosi. As for the media I share your distrust. It's all about dangling the latest shiny object with just enough tarnish showing to discredit said object, with a good dose of bothsiderism, and a pass for the Capitalist Party leaders.
Defending this OP has resulted in my sounding...
rather obsessed on the subject, but that's just the outcome of responding consistently.
In the scheme of real things, AOC is nothing yet. But in the sphere of propaganda, she is a strong new move, a move that must be resisted before it becomes set in media concrete, like Russiagate.
I appreciate your comment. For the moment, I'm stuck to the tarbaby of consistently defending my OP.
I apoogize
I get mixed up on topics and think sideways too much.
No worries. Nothing to apologize for.
Part of the normal give and take, especially as post count on a thread approaches 100 and you can't remember who said what to whom.
I appreciate your informed comments.
great diary, arendt.
and i couldn't agree more. ocasio2018 has already stepped on her own 'brand' in so many ways. my favorite tankies on twitter, @cordeliers and red kahina make a lot of sport of her, given that she's their newly elected congresswoman. if i say they may be a bit obsessed by now, in many ways i can understand why. most recently, campaigning to 'abolish ice', then backing to 'creating a kinder, gentler ICE', now voting to fund DHS and the border patrol makes her look silly.
iirc, the green party green new deal called for shutting down the 900-1000 amerikan military bases, ending wars, et., given that the largest carbon footprint in the US is...the military.
anyhoo, i can't say that there isn't a bit of over-speculation at wrong kind of green here, but in the main, it seems pretty spot on.
@cordeliers
22h22 hours ago
Club des Cordeliers Retweeted WrongKindofGreen: Astroturf climate change NGO @sunrisemvmt - collaborators with @aoc in Pelosi publicity stunt - is backed by http://350.org , charged with hijacking the environmental movement on behalf of Buffet and the Rockefellers.
lol, he retweets aoc comix on twitter, too. some are funnier than others, of course.
Thanks for the wrong kind of green link
Of course, its depressing to realize how the labor unions are in bed with the fossil fuel interests.
The continuation of the species-cidal fossil fuel policies is about to have a Thelma and Louise moment, when we cross that 2C "event horizon" and it all becomes a runaway train:
Massive methane releases already happening in the arctic.
Unstable methane clathrates on the ocean floor suddenly destabilizing.
Methane is much more greenhouse-producing than CO2.
The knock on effects of this: melting permafrost demolishing human infrastructure in those regions; sea level rise; glacier depletion leading to massive water shortages downstream, especially in the Himalayas-fed regions; ocid acidification destroying shellfish populations and corals; increased water temperature destroying coral reefs (already happening on Great Barrier Reef).
And the pushback from fossil fuels is to refuse to admit they have been wrong, to pretend that the current situation can be continued with some bogus technological fix.
I'm glad I'm not going to be around for more than a couple more decades. The planet is going to have a reset, and humans aren't going to be part of it.
A differing view
I tried to avoid commenting on this essay because I honestly do not think that Ocasio Cortes is that important in the grand scheme of things. Focusing upon her places far too much emphasis upon the cult of personality versus issues and ideas. For the most part, Ocasio Cortes as the bright new political personality has shined a light on some issues I deem important, so for that I am grateful.
Beyond that, she is just another politician and I have long posted here that politicians are the appointed guardians of the status quo. It does not take long for an eager young politician to become deeply ingrained as to what their real job in Washington entails. Therefore no one of us should be putting our faith in any politician.
Good or bad, no politician can change or escape the system under which our government now operates. Real change can only come from the people which is what we have been seeing with the Yellow Vest movement in France. And the reality is that whatever concessions they win from the Macron government, will be difficult to maintain for long because of the neoloiberal system under which their government operates.
The real issue is the system which needs to be destroyed. It appears that this essay is trying to say that we the people are allowing ourselves to have our attention diverted from that fact by the bright, shiny new object known as Alexandria Ocasio Cortes and the author may be right about that. However, by focusing upon Ocasio Cortes instead of the system, the author has also diverted us away from the real issue of our severely broken system of government.
I think this essay has been valuable in that it has spawned a lot of excellent commentary of widely varying opinions.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
I take your point. It is walking a knife edge.
Its true that in order to fight the attention diversion of AOC, I have diverted attention from the real issues. Mea culpa. However, in my defense, the constant manufacture of diverting sheepdogs like AOC is a real issue. Until everyone instantly says, in the well-scripted words of Ronald Reagan, "there they go again", its important to push back against the propaganda barrage that is meant to build another "settlement wall" through the middle of progressive territory.
As I said to someone else, I'm compulsive about responding in my OPs. So it might look like I'm obsessed with AOC. But its only my normal behavior on any topic I take the trouble to write about.
I appreciate your responding
to comments in your essays. I try to do so myself too. I certainly was not accusing you of being obsessive and I hope that I did not come off that way.
Like I said, this essay has spawned a lot of great commentary. And the commentary is often where we learn the most from one another.
This may be an issue, but for me, the real issue is the complete hijack of our government and the asset stripping of our people by the neoliberal oligarchs. The constant manufacturing of diversionary sheepdogs is a result of that system.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
I always appreciate a conversation with you
You have a viewpoint informed by practical experience in politics and government, whereas my POV is strictly intellectual.
I didn't take it that way. In fact, I called "obsessive" on myself, because I know I have this bug about "being consistent" even it makes me sound obsessive.
That's a valid distinction. My view is that the media is a gateway built and now completely controlled by the oligarchs. You want to stop the asset stripping, you have to either go over/around the gate (alternate media, street demos, etc.) or blow up the gate (call out the BS manufacture of sheepdogs).
I consider my pushback against AOC propaganda to be trying to warn people not to beat their heads against a locked gate.
I recognize the game being played: steal the genuine left's policies with sheepdogs, then have the sheepdogs corrupt, discredit, or sabotage those policies - all the while keeping the genuine left out of the discussion except to blame them for fraudulent problems (Bernie Bros, Russiagate). I mean really, TPTB stole the term "fake" from people calling out the 24/7 BS that is the corporate media. It makes an educated person's head spin trying to keep up with the lies.
I think calling out the media is important, if only to wake people up to how fake it is. You can only do that on a case-by-case basis. In this case, the fakery is in the beatification of a neophyte nobody.
Your response
This response has given me more pause to consider. My own thought processes tend to be on the big picture level, so I look at the issue as being the system.
But this part of your comment provides me with another way of looking at it that is also valid. While I have differing view of the big picture, I can now see that your essay is an effort to tear down that first layer of the information wall that is being used against us.
Again, while we may not agree completely, a respectful discourse in the comments does help each of us to understand how we have come to our own conclusions, both of which have valid points. This is exactly what I love about this site.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Thank you!
We need to take a page from the Zapatistas, so that we lead and the politicians obey.
“When there's no fight over programme, the election becomes a casting exercise. Trump's win is the unstoppable consequence of this situation.” - Jean-Luc Melanchon
Read my first sig line
It says it all for me. And thank you, Cass.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Pages