VOX can go to hell

For pete f'ing sake! Must the Bernie wing fight neoliberal smears for eternity?

I just read David Roberts’s Vox piece, "Everything mattered: lessons from 2016's bizarre presidential election"--posted on FB by Ezra Klein (did Ezra actually write it? It was "updated by David Roberts," anyway). It poses as an attempt to be fair-minded and neutral. “Everything mattered,” he initially suggests, including the failure of Democrats to reach out to economically depressed areas in the Upper Midwest with any real economic message. Except that’s not what he argues at al. Quite the opposite; it's a hit piece on Sanders' economic message.

First he has us wade through interesting portraits from Nate Silver on demographic shifts and voting shifts from 2000 to 2016 … great great great … then suddenly we’re met with a deluge of cold water. For Roberts, everything matters EXCEPT the white working class of the Upper Midwest (and elsewhere). Those blue-collar Midwesterners “that make our eyes mist up when we watch those Chevy commercials”—the people that Bernie Sanders and Michael Moore are dumb enough to care about—are nothing but racist assholes. Rather than reaching out, we need to call them out. Because reaching out … well … that only leads to more Howard Deans saying “I want to be the candidate for the guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks,” or more demonizing of Sister Souljah and “passing punitive law-and-order policies,” or more of “supporting fossil fuels” like Joe Manchin of West Virginia, or more of “making a big show of, say, hunting” a la John Kerry in 2004. Get it? Bernie Sanders economic message is just like Howard Dean's appeal to neo-Confederates and Bill Clinton's carceral state and John Kerry's silly attempt to portray himself as a hunter.

I’m sure Roberts really could have been more sarcastic, bitter, and small-minded had he tried, but he was being restrained and objective. Yep, “everything mattered” in election 2016 he tells us, except what actually did matter: class. Indeed, to worry about class, he suggests, is to veer toward racism. Roberts includes a tweet from James Surowiecki. “Ppl. worry the concern with working-class whites will lead to PoC being marginalized for good reason: it's happened so many times before.”

Mr. Roberts and Mr. Surowiecki have an understanding of history that is two-inches deep. Mr. Roberts and Mr. Surowiecki … may I give you a brief tutorial in history? I’m not saying you’re entirely wrong, only that you’re half wrong. For every moment in U.S. history when economic populists have marginalized people of color, there is another moment when elites (like your beloved neoliberals) have used race to divide the working class. When workers in steel or coal or any number of other industries went on strike, employers brought in African-American scabs. When the People’s Party (the original “Populists”) recruited African-American farmers into their movement, the Bourbon Democrats responded with Jim Crow laws. When the Central Pacific was faced with paying living wages to build tracks eastward, it turned to cheap Chinese labor. When the Lowell, Massachusetts mills found that Yankee women were more than willing to strike, they brought in desperate Irish women. Republicans, moreover, have been playing that game for decades … appealing to the white Southern working class (and now a broader working class) in order to peel them off from the Democratic base. And your neoliberals have played right into their hands.

I’m not celebrating nativism here. I'm just reiterating what is obvious to anyone who studies history. Yes, working-class whites have been given to racism; and yes, economic elites have used race to undermine the working class ... which is just what you and your neoliberal friends are doing.

Okay, but here’s something that Roberts presents that is worth considering: Russ Feingold and Ted Strickland both “campaigned on economically populist platforms—but they did notably worse than Hillary Clinton.” (“notably worse” meaning a couple of points, as I recall, because apparently they didn’t get votes from conservative Republican women, whereas Clinton did). Good point. But what about a true progressive (with economic creds) like Tim Nolan whose Minnesota district went Trump by 17 points, but who won re-election over a well-funded Republican by a narrow margin? IGNORE! IGNORE! IGNORE! Does not compute! Or what about the largely working-class white voters of Placer County, CA, going for Trump by 11 but going for Kamala Harris, a black woman, by 28 points? IGNORE! IGNORE! IGNORE! Does not compute!

Roberts’s final takeaway on election 2016: “appeals to xenophobia and white resentment work. If I may coin a phrase: It’s the white resentment, stupid.” Well duh! Of course! The racial resentment message has been working since the Democratic Party of 1858 called Lincoln a “black Republican” and denied him a seat in the Senate. The politics of racial resentment shouldn’t be some big discovery in 2016. What we need to focus on is how the hell do we turn resentment into progressive politics? And Roberts knows that! He concludes with a vague statement about the need to create a coalition by giving Americans a common goal—a message and a platform—that they can rally around. He simply avoids saying what that common goal and message will be, because the answer is economics. That’s the only answer, but he can't bring himself to say it because it undermines everything he's written.

Before he gets to the vague common goal/message plea, meanwhile, he tells us that Clinton put forward “the most progressive economic platform in a half-century,” but that stories about email-gate, etc., drowned it out. But even if email-gate and “fake news” stories had not drowned out her wonderfully progressive economic message, he insists, the white working class of the upper Midwest wouldn’t have listened. Roberts doesn’t want to admit that Clinton’s economic package was compromised by her centrist, pro-TPP, anti-TPP waffling and her all-too-apparent crush on Wall Street. Trump was telling people “I’ll bring your jobs back by stopping free trade.” Hillary Clinton, in return, offered nothing but complex policy that couldn’t be easily translated easily into a campaign message, partly because her campaign didn’t even try. They were too focused on the character issue, though their own candidate had largely inoculated Trump on almost every charge (misogyny? Bill Clinton. Conflict of interest? Clinton Foundation. Tax evasion? Wall Street speeches. Competency? Emailgate. etc. etc.)

Then Roberts treats us to a tedious screed on white male pundits sticking up for the honor of the white working class by telling people “they’re not all racists, so don’t lump them all in that category.” This sort of thing, he argues, is what creates “racism without racists.” He cites studies and/or articles showing that whites (esp. men) have predispositions to sexism and racism … so to defend their honor is to defend their evil.

Here’s the kicker: “What American mainstream pundits often cannot see is that the latitude they extend white voters — ‘they know not what they do, they’re good people at heart, they’re just hurting’ — is the essence of white privilege.” In other words, anybody who supports an economic message—including all of us who were so ardent for Bernie Sanders—are racist hypocrites. Now that we’re in a real mess with Trump in the Oval Office, we even more desperately need to ramp up our disgust with the white working class!

In the end, he tells us, "everything" did not matter. The election was strictly evil people versus good people. The saved against the damned. So let’s just sail our ship onward in the same direction we were headed, folks! Let’s continue to allow neoliberals to make race a wedge issue rather than give people a common economic message that they can rally around. Let's pit people of color against white progressives so we continue to win--or in this case, lose--elections by narrow margins. Let's continue to lose Senate and House seats and state legislatures by the score!

Finally, since Mr. Roberts thought it necessary to lecture us economic progressives on "white privilege," I'll offer him my own lecture on neoliberal privilege. Privilege, Mr. Roberts, is when you have George Soros and a whole army of other multi-millionaires and billionaires funding your candidates, campaigns, think tanks, operatives, and wonks. Privilege is when you and your elite wonk friends are so far above the median income that you needn't worry whether you can pay the mortgage, or rent, or health insurance, or cost of drugs. Privilege is when you can be certain that your children will get a college education at an elite institution, and won't be debt-bound by doing so. Privilege is being beloved by tech and pharmaceutical and financial industry executives, who shower you with plaudits and expensive dinners and give your children internships and high-paying jobs. Privilege is using race as a wedge issue to divide the working class and protect your neoliberal agenda. Privilege is telling the world that offering Americans economic security is a way to evade the issues of racism and sexism, rather than a way to address those issues in the most effective way possible (by unifying people and giving them measurable gains). Privilege is writing off the white working class as racists and sexists and urging the Democratic Party to do likewise (which, in effect, is a way to write off the entire working class--of all races, sexes, and gender preferences--by dividing it against itself). Privilege is believing yourself to be progressive on racial and gender matters while continuing to support unfettered free trade, outsourcing, and neoliberal "globalism," including extra-national tribunals on trade issues that deny sovereignty to democratic nation states. Privilege is being able to assure yourself that billionaires who move industries to countries like China are actually humanitarians who bring poor people jobs, rather than self-seeking union-busters. Privilege is being able to support Third-Way Democrats who can win elections—sometimes—but cannot create a mandate for progressive change, and who continue to undermine grassroots organizing by looking upward for support rather than sideways or downwards. Privilege is standing by, blithely, while your supposedly strong party loses statehouse after statehouse because it cannot speak to rural and blue-collar electorates except via a politics of racial division. Yes, I grant, the Republicans are way way more dedicated to racial division than Democrats, but we play into their trap by putting our (very worthy) diversity message ahead of our economic message. That, my friend, is privilege. Look in the mirror.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

kharma's picture

They will never get it nor ever admit what they don't want to acknowledge. For that alone they should be ignored.

up
0 users have voted.

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.. This...is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.--John Adams

Steven D's picture

they told the writer what to write and, because he likes his cushy job, he came through.

The Neo-Lib wing of the party is so effing desperate to hold on to their "money" and their position in an increasingly irrelevant party that they could care less about winning elections. The sole reason the Dems exist now is to create the illusion of an opposition party. Meanwhile they push for the economic agenda of the 1% that both "major" parties promote with increasing savagery and indifference to the people the Dems claim to be fighting for.

Great response, great essay, just great all around especially your closing rant on privilege.

Thank you.

Steve

up
0 users have voted.

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Lily O Lady's picture

"The sole reason the Dems exist now is to create the illusion of an opposition party. Meanwhile they push for the economic agenda of the 1% that both "major" parties promote with increasing savagery and indifference to the people the Dems claim to be fighting for."

This is exactly right! It keeps the 1% firmly in control.

up
0 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

Wink's picture

around to more actively involving myself with the local yokel Dem party honchos here in my neck of the woods during the 2008 election cycle. By 2010 it had finally sunk in that the honchos were more interested in the social functions than electing candidates. I thought it was just my local honchos, but others in the cd here - NY-21 - reported the same. The Dem party has become more a Social Club than a political party.

up
0 users have voted.

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.

Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

Democrats seem to be completely invested in wedge politics. Nancy Pelosi says we don't want a new direction and that everything is hunky dory, just poor messaging. Democrats could define the word 'moribund'. Can they be as bad as they are unconsciously? David Brock is calling for an "audit" of what went wrong in the election. The idea of David Brock wanting accountability for what went wrong, when he himself has got to be in the top 5 is off the irony charts.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

Anja Geitz's picture

When the GOP did their audit and were told they needed to start including more POC into their party and their message, the Dems all laughed.

If the Dems do an audit and are told they need to include the working class into their party and their message, the Republicans will laugh.

Who is not laughing in all this? Anyone whose retirement plan is basically a well timed suicide.

up
0 users have voted.

There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier

And in the meantime, everything is kept divvied up by such things as politicians speaking of appealing to the 'male White working-class' rather than of the working-class in its entirety, of whatever gender or historical nationality they may happen to be, 'othering' everyone else outside each narrow range.

If everybody was thought of and spoken of as deserving a living wage and fair and 'equal rights, treatment and opportunity', as is guaranteed under the US Constitution, such a lot of problems would not exist...

A melting-pot, in the sense used to describe countries such as Canada and the US, has no dividers but lets the contents mingle freely to form a thereby enriched mixture.

One of the things noticeable to various observers in much of the rest of the world is the way in which people in the US are divvied up (and set against each other) in any corporate media/official electoral/policy discussion, a tactic to which Americans have become so inured they often don't even seem to notice it... PR is based upon language and association affecting perception and it can be very hard to fight, once affected by it. Especially when it's being imposed by those forming what's supposed to be, whatever the party name, democratic government representing the public interest, not just that of the greediest few already having sucked up most of what everyone should have had enough of for a decent and comfortable life all along. And hanging onto it, indeed, ever increasing it, in great part, by such divisive tactics.

The people united will never be defeated. And if the people of the United States ever stand up for their actual Constitutional rights to be protected and enforced, the parasites will be appropriately expelled from their inappropriate position of power in draining the body politic of America (and of other countries, by using their theft of wealth and power from Americans and elsewhere) and the very life from the planet.

If not, we all go out either with a nuclear bang or an impoverished, polluted and dry-throated, gasping whimper for lack of income, shelter, safe food, breathable air or potable water, all for corporate/billionaire and their government lackey's insatiable and pathological greed.

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

up
0 users have voted.

"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"

Hawkfish's picture

The reason that people like Roberts think that you can separate race from class is that they (correctly) see the pie as smaller and shrinking. Given that, it makes sense from a historical perspective to give someone else a turn. Does that phrase sound familiar?

The real problem is that the pie is shrinking in the first place. This is what happens when r > g (return on investment is greater than economic growth). The only solution is to make the pie grow through wealth redistribution. With a growing pie, you can solve both the collapse of the white working class and the disenfranchisement of everyone else.

Roberts and his ilk will never do this, though, partly because their donors will watch civilization burn before they do anything, and partly because they are intellectual racists who hope to get a place on the island with their owners.

up
0 users have voted.

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

make me even less likely to even consider voting Democratic. Why should I vote for candidates that despise me? It is abundantly clear that white working people are not wanted in the Democratic Party. I mourn for the '70s when Democrats stood for a color blind society.

Republican platforms are a bundle of zombie economic lies, religious prejudice, and obsession with women's organs. Until there is a viable third option, I'm joining the majority that don't vote.

I voted for the Greens, but Jill Stein's efforts to put Hillary Clinton in the White House has turned me completely off.

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

If things don't change, I'm seriously thinking my next step is to stay home. Particularly since I'm in Michigan, and our votes are not even good enough to be eligible for a recount.

As far as Stein goes, what "evidence" do you have she was "helping Hillary"? If she was, Hillary did a really crappy job of picking up the ball. Trump had 100s of lawyers present where recounts were taking place, Jill had none. If this was for Hillary or Soros was funding Jill, I'm pretty sure they'd have watch dogs present.

Jill's efforts exposed Michigan's voting system to be a pile of shit. If you want to steal an election, throw away one ballot and it guarantees no recount and the whatever count is submitted will stand.

Thanks to Jill, MI learned that our voting equipment is broken and outdated. It works with Windows XP and is not compatible with newer Window's products. So I guess, they're making tick marks on paper. I learned that Michigan law guarantees that recounts cannot happen in our state because they are certifying votes that are not able to be reconciled. Obama's judge reversed himself and ended the recount because voters have no standing and right to know if their vote was counted. Only those elites with enough money to run for President have standing and a right to demand a recount of my vote.

up
0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Did I mention Stein at all? I don't think so!! I think Stein hurt Clinton but didn't take the election from her. I'm fairly certain that Gary Johnson took a lot more votes from Trump than Stein took from Clinton. And even if you added all of Stein's votes to Clinton's, the only state that then goes Hillary is Michigan, I think. The Hillary campaign and their media supporters, moreover, hypothesize that ALL Stein voters would have gone HRC, had Stein not been running, but that is absurd. Stein has a base that will always support her, and did so in 2012. She doubled her 2012 numbers ... so potentially she took 350,000 total votes that Clinton might have gotten. But still not enough to change the results, had Stein not been running.

I'm glad Michigan is now aware of the flaws in its voting system! I wish the country would wake up to this. I have no idea whether the election machines were hacked in 2004, or 2016. They certainly could have been! The only way we'll know is to do recounts. But even that won't definitively prove anything, will it? Not without a paper trail.

up
0 users have voted.

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

you will see that I was responding to VitW.

up
0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

orlbucfan's picture

No way did it cost $hrill. Add them in, and tRump is still ahead. Johnson, the yahoo who couldn't name 2 world leaders, got a lot more votes. He pulled them from the idiots who would have voted tRump. Very disgustingly sad, but true! Rec'd!!

up
0 users have voted.

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

She (Stein) can't possibly win. BTW, I fully expect Hillary to be inaugurated in January between recounts and EC shenanigans. If so, I hope the (R)'s start impeachment proceedings immediately, but the will probably pass relaxed (gutted) banking regulations and TPP first.

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

You are entitled to your opinion, but your statement is opinion. If you had a reliable source for that statement, I'm sure you would have linked it back to me.

I hope Hillary does steal it, and it ends up with four years of squabbling, impeachment, and obstruction. The only way either team of assholes will do no harm is to do nothing. Even then they manage to fuck something up.

I have never experienced an election as awful and blatantly corrupt as this one. The duopoly and its parties suck. I don't believe there is any escape but a full out collapse, and even then, to the victors go the spoils.

up
0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

edg's picture

I was born in Holy Cross Hospital on the East Side of Detroit in 1955. I grew up in the Charles Terrace housing project until the mid-1960s, when my family moved to Warren. That was a big jump for us -- 3 miles north, from McNichols (6 Mile Rd) to 9 Mile Rd. I lived in Michigan until 1984, or nearly half my life.

The reason Hillary didn't release the hounds for the recount in Michigan is that she knew the truth. The truth is the Wayne County's voting systems are so fucked up that there were more votes than ballots. Scanners malfunctioned and people pushed their ballots through again. But instead of only counting a single pass, the dysfunctional software counted every time a voter pushed the same damn ballot in again.

If there were a recount of Detroit and Wayne Country, Hillary Clinton would lose votes. Which would make her loss even worse.

The judge correctly ruled that a candidate without standing could not force a recount. Hillary Clinton could have gotten a recount. She was the allegedly aggrieved party. Jill Stein was an asterisk in this election. There is no way a recount could or would benefit her.

Lastly, you're jumping to an unsupported conclusion. You said voters have no standing. That's nonsense. It was correctly determined that Stein had no standing. Voters of Michigan were not part of the recount effort because Michigan law limits them to only requesting recounts on ballot initiatives and questions.

168.879(b) The petition alleges that the candidate is aggrieved on account of fraud or mistake in the canvass of the votes by the inspectors of election or the returns made by the inspectors, or by a board of county canvassers or the board of state canvassers.

I understand you're upset by the outcome of the election. However, I feel your anger is aimed at the wrong targets. If you don't like Michigan's current law, work to change it. If you don't like the voting systems, work to get them replaced. If you don't like Michigan being run by a Republican governor and legislature, work to get the SOBs thrown out. Focus on what needs to be fixed and set about fixing it.

up
0 users have voted.

I am not angry as much as disgusted. You left in 1984. You have no idea how bad this state has gotten under one-party GOP rule. I blame the Democrats for that too. Just like the Senate race that is going on in LA.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-rallies-louisiana-republican-voters-fo...

Where the fuck is our cute, cuddly and oh so popular Obama or the other Dems who only need to tweak their marketing message. They abandoned the states. There is no doubt in my mind that the elections will show another GOP win in Michigan, and if our voting equipment and laws are this fucked, who can contest it?

I truly believe the only escape is for a group of states to secede. This country is too big and too divided. I dumped all red friends. I barely tolerate relatives that are red. So obviously I am extremely aggrieved at having to put up with strangers who are red. I want my own country and a wall to keep those people out.

up
0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

themselves often enough: "Am I better off with him/her or without him/her"

Life's tough enough without constant static, in my opinion.

up
0 users have voted.

"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"

Anja Geitz's picture

Is for a group of states to secede. I live in California. A state that is also talking about seceding. So where do the people living in California who feel economically disenfranchised by both parties go? And how do the "new" states that secede deal with Social Security, UnEmployment Benefits, and Medicare when a large portion of taxes paying for that are coming from the country they are no longer a part of? Maybe I'm missing something here?

up
0 users have voted.

There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier

Fri, 12/09/2016 - 1:31pm — zoebear

You say the only escape

Is for a group of states to secede. I live in California. A state that is also talking about seceding. So where do the people living in California who feel economically disenfranchised by both parties go? And how do the "new" states that secede deal with Social Security, UnEmployment Benefits, and Medicare when a large portion of taxes paying for that are coming from the country they are no longer a part of? Maybe I'm missing something here?

... So where do the people living in California who feel economically disenfranchised by both parties go? ...

Well, they don't actually have to go anywhere to go to hell, but with robots about to displace people, the move is on to get those non-billionaire poors the hell out to anywhere else that the wealthiest won't have to step over their starved bodies when leaving the (driverless) limo.

This is interesting, though, in view of something I recently read (and now can't seem to find) regarding the tech industry starting their own countries/rule of law and California seceding, assuming that I can find anything on this again. (Couldn't find what I had read, seem to be getting mostly older and more unrelated stuff on this now in searches... probably using wrong terms, being rather tired and having to go do things rather often, due to imperative puppy issues.)

A number of top government officials - starting with the TPP et al/corporate coup-initiating Bush Admin - seem to have also gone into venture capital (having inside info and all) in the fairly recent past, while Google has been buying up robotics, including companies producing military robots, and hired from DARPA as well, while working on the Singularity. Obama, however, is specifically going to Silicone Valley.

http://www.recode.net/2016/4/26/11586424/google-white-house-visits

A chart of lobbyists' White House visits reveals its close ties with Google
The Campaign for Accountability found more than 125 meetings between Google and White House staff.
by Dawn Chmielewski Apr 26, 2016

In a town where proximity to power is a measure of clout, Google’s ties with the Obama administration in Washington, D.C., are unrivaled among its tech and telecom peers. At least in sheer quantity.

Google’s head of public policy has met with White House officials 128 times over the course of the Obama administration* — more visits than the telecom and cable industries combined, according to the nonpartisan watchdog group Campaign for Accountability.

Johanna Shelton visited with White House representatives nearly twice as often as the next most frequent visitor, Alissa Fox of Blue Cross/Blue Shield, who met with White House officials 75 times, the group found. ...

... The information was released as part of the watchdog group’s Google Transparency Project, which is intended to shed light on how the giant corporation influences government officials and public policy. The Campaign for Accountability says its has spent a year collecting and interpreting thousands of pages of public records and online documents to create this database. The nonprofit declined to share its funding source.

Earlier this week, The Intercept published a report with prior figures on Google’s proximity to the White House, but it did not include the chart above. ...

... * U.S. Chief Technology Officer Megan Smith is a former Google executive and the longtime spouse of Re/code Executive Editor Kara Swisher, from whom she is now separated.

Please note that this is specified as covering up to October 31st 2015, and that 2016 is now virtually over.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3554953/Google-staffers-meetings...

REVEALED: Google staffers have had at least 427 meetings at the White House over course of Obama presidency - averaging more than one a week

The White House's close relationship with Google was highlighted in data published Friday
Records show 169 Google employees met with 182 government officials
Google's top lobbyist paid 128 visits to the White House since 2009
'Of course' Google is a frequent guest, company responded in statement

By Dailymail.com Reporter

Published: 07:01 GMT, 23 April 2016 | Updated: 16:56 GMT, 23 April 2016

Newly compiled data reveals Google and its affiliates have attended meetings at the White House more than once a week, on average, since President Barack Obama took office.

Numbers crunched by the Campaign for Accountability and the Intercept show 169 Google employees have met with 182 government officials in the White House.

The meetings took place at least 427 times. The data used spans from Obama's first month in office in 2009 until October 2015, and includes government meetings with representatives of Google-affiliated companies Tomorrow Ventures and Civis Analytics.

Is anyone outside of the actual American public intended to be shut out of foreign policy and other 'secret' state business?

https://googletransparencyproject.org/articles/googles-white-house-meetings

Google's White House Meetings

... The tally excludes large events at the White House such as state dinners, parties or industry conferences. Most of the remainder were intimate gatherings: one-on-one meetings with key White House officials, or small groups of Google executives and a White House official or two—meetings at which public policies are likely to have been discussed.

The company’s top ranks have enjoyed frequent and direct contact with the top echelons of the Obama White House. Senior Google executives have met at least 21 times with President Obama in small, intimate meetings. Senior company executives also met at least 20 times with President Obama’s key political and economic advisers, including Jack Lew, Pete Rouse, Bill Daley, Jeff Zients, Denis McDonough, Valerie Jarrett, Jason Furman, Rahm Emmanuel and Kathy Ruemmler.

Overall, Google executives have had extraordinary access to the White House meetings at which policies are set. Google executives met over 100 times with the White House offices that set and execute White House policy, including the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), National Economic Council (NEC), Council of Economic Advisors (CEA), National Security Council (NSC) and others.

Records show that employees of the Silicon Valley giant have been present at meetings encompassing a surprisingly wide range of topics including intellectual property, national security, government contracts, digital media strategy, antitrust, biotechnology, energy and climate change, broadband and telecommunications, foreign policy, healthcare, aerospace and aeronautics.iii

The scope of the company’s influence within the White House isn’t confined to the company’s core search business. For example, the company appears to have met with the White House over its side bets, and those of its top executives.

Representatives of Google’s venture capital arm, Google Ventures, met with White House officials five times, while representatives from Google’s “moon shot” program, Google[X], have also been to the White House.

Employees of Eric Schmidt’s private venture capital fund, Tomorrow Ventures, logged 14 White House visits. Another company in which Schmidt is the sole investor, Civis Analytics, met with White House officials at least 51 times. The company, started by former data “whiz-kids” from Obama’s 2012 Obama re-election campaign, was instrumental in fixing the bungled launch of the HealthCare.gov website in 2013, alongside several Google software engineers. [See article on Civis Analytics].iv
Jared Cohen

Google’s executives have met with the White House to discuss U.S. foreign policy matters. Former key State Department officials such as Jared Cohen, now the head of Google’s “think/do” tank, Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas), have met with White House officials on several occasions.
What the Data Suggest

Google’s unfettered access to the White House calls into question the president’s commitment to limit the influence of lobbyists in his administration. While the lobbyists and industries they represent may have changed, the influence of one company, Google, has arguably only deepened during Obama’s eight years in office. ...

... Google’s proximity to the Obama administration has been remarked upon since its earliest days.vii Eight years later, however, the relationship between Google and Obama has developed to become broader and deeper than anyone could then have imagined, encompassing an enormous variety of basic government functions.

An in-depth examination of the visitor logs shows the extent to which Google has enmeshed its own corporate interests with those of the U.S. government. In many respects, the relationship is so close it’s often difficult to determine exactly where the federal government ends and Google begins.

The Google Transparency Project has compiled a database of every meeting it could find between Google employees and White House officials. We invite the public to explore the data and suggest stories for the GTP and interested journalists and researchers to pursue.

(Gotta read this in full at source: Obama asks the same questions of 'any great investor'? 'Great' investor, as in special because of having lots of money? Or just investing great sums of money? I initially thought it must be a typo-ed 'great inventor'... but in this group, I suppose that having lots of money makes you 'great' automatically.)
http://qz.com/715765/hes-kind-of-perfect-for-the-job-obama-hints-at-a-fu...

INVESTOR IN CHIEF
“He’s kind of perfect for the job”: Obama hints at a future in VC, and Silicon Valley is salivating

In seven months, Barack Obama will leave the White House as president of the United States. He’s going to need a job. In an interview with Bloomberg on June 13, he hinted at the possibility of joining entrepreneurs and venture capitalists in Silicon Valley.

Obama said “had I not gone into politics, I’d probably be starting some kind of business,” said Obama. “The skill set of starting my presidential campaigns—and building the kinds of teams that we did and marketing ideas—I think would be the same kinds of skills that I would enjoy exercising in the private sector. … The conversations I have with Silicon Valley and with venture capital pull together my interests in science and organization in a way I find really satisfying.”

On hearing the news, Valley investors were quick to save the president a spot on Sand Hill Road. Obama, of course, wouldn’t be the first Washington power player to make such a move. Former secretary of defense Colin Powell joined Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers in 2005, followed by former vice president Al Gore in 2007. Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state under George W. Bush, teamed up with Khosla Ventures in 2012. Numerous Congressional representatives and government officials have found homes at venture firms in the Bay Area. ...

... Pascal Finette at Singularity University also said Obama’s decision to finally ditch the Blackberry in favor of a new smartphone was also a sign that he’s ready for the Valley.

Obama should have bigger aspirations than pleasing investors.
Rob Nail, who leads Singularity University, argued Obama could do better than joining one of the big firms that would likely have him investing in apps and software. ...

Makes you wonder if the Smartphone is just that much better for Google to keep (edit: tabs on) than was the Blackberry...

'Singularity' is rather interesting as a name-choice for a university, considering.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/22/robots-google-ray-kur...

Are the robots about to rise? Google's new director of engineering thinks so…
Ray Kurzweil popularised the Teminator-like moment he called the 'singularity', when artificial intelligence overtakes human thinking. But now the man who hopes to be immortal is involved in the very same quest – on behalf of the tech behemoth

See our gallery of cinematic killer robots
Robot from The Terminator
The Terminator films envisage a future in which robots have become sentient and are at war with humankind. Ray Kurzweil thinks that machines could become ‘conscious’ by 2029 but is optimistic about the implications for humans.
Carole Cadwalladr

... Ray Kurzweil believes that, by 2029, computers will be able to do all the things that humans do. Only better. ...

... It's since been revealed that Google has gone on an unprecedented shopping spree and is in the throes of assembling what looks like the greatest artificial intelligence laboratory on Earth; a laboratory designed to feast upon a resource of a kind that the world has never seen before: truly massive data. Our data. From the minutiae of our lives.

Google has bought almost every machine-learning and robotics company it can find, or at least, rates. It made headlines two months ago, when it bought Boston Dynamics, the firm that produces spectacular, terrifyingly life-like military robots, for an "undisclosed" but undoubtedly massive sum. It spent $3.2bn (£1.9bn) on smart thermostat maker Nest Labs. And this month, it bought the secretive and cutting-edge British artificial intelligence startup DeepMind for £242m.

And those are just the big deals. It also bought Bot & Dolly, Meka Robotics, Holomni, Redwood Robotics and Schaft, and another AI startup, DNNresearch. It hired Geoff Hinton, a British computer scientist who's probably the world's leading expert on neural networks. And it has embarked upon what one DeepMind investor told the technology publication Re/code two weeks ago was "a Manhattan project of AI". If artificial intelligence was really possible, and if anybody could do it, he said, "this will be the team". The future, in ways we can't even begin to imagine, will be Google's. ...

... When Kurzweil first started talking about the "singularity", a conceit he borrowed from the science-fiction writer Vernor Vinge, he was dismissed as a fantasist. ...

... Except that Kurzweil's new home isn't some futuristic MegaCorp intent on world domination. It's not Skynet. Or, maybe it is, but we largely still think of it as that helpful search engine with the cool design. Kurzweil has worked with Google's co-founder Larry Page on special projects over several years. "And I'd been having ongoing conversations with him about artificial intelligence and what Google is doing and what I was trying to do. And basically he said, 'Do it here. We'll give you the independence you've had with your own company, but you'll have these Google-scale resources.'"

And it's the Google-scale resources that are beyond anything the world has seen before. Such as the huge data sets that result from 1 billion people using Google ever single day. And the Google knowledge graph, which consists of 800m concepts and the billions of relationships between them. This is already a neural network, a massive, distributed global "brain". Can it learn? Can it think? It's what some of the smartest people on the planet are working on next. ...

... I first saw Boston Dynamics' robots in action at a presentation at the Singularity University, the university that Ray Kurzweil co-founded and that Google helped fund and which is devoted to exploring exponential technologies. And it was the Singularity University's own robotics faculty member Dan Barry who sounded a note of alarm about what the technology might mean: "I don't see any end point here," he said when talking about the use of military robots. "At some point humans aren't going to be fast enough. So what you do is that you make them autonomous. And where does that end? Terminator?"

And the woman who headed the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), the secretive US military agency that funded the development of BigDog? Regina Dugan. Guess where she works now? ...

... So we would like to actually have the computers read. We want them to read everything on the web and every page of every book, then be able to engage an intelligent dialogue with the user to be able to answer their questions."

Google will know the answer to your question before you have asked it, he says. It will have read every email you've ever written, every document, every idle thought you've ever tapped into a search-engine box. It will know you better than your intimate partner does. Better, perhaps, than even yourself. ...

... And once the computers can read their own instructions, well… gaining domination over the rest of the universe will surely be easy pickings. Though Kurzweil, being a techno-optimist, doesn't worry about the prospect of being enslaved by a master race of newly liberated iPhones with ideas above their station. He believes technology will augment us. Make us better, smarter, fitter. That just as we've already outsourced our ability to remember telephone numbers to their electronic embrace, so we will welcome nanotechnologies that thin our blood and boost our brain cells. His mind-reading search engine will be a "cybernetic friend". He is unimpressed by Google Glass because he doesn't want any technological filter between us and reality. He just wants reality to be that much better. ...

... And what about her father's idea of living for ever? What did she make of that? "What I think is interesting is that all kids think they are going to live for ever so actually it wasn't that much of a disconnect for me. I think it made perfect sense. Now it makes less sense." ...

... But isn't he simply refusing to accept, on an emotional level, that everyone gets older, everybody dies?

"I think that's a great rationalisation because our immediate reaction to hearing someone has died is that it's not a good thing. We're sad. We consider it a tragedy. So for thousands of years, we did the next best thing which is to rationalise. 'Oh that tragic thing? That's really a good thing.' One of the major goals of religion is to come up with some story that says death is really a good thing. It's not. It's a tragedy. And people think we're talking about a 95-year-old living for hundreds of years. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking radical life extension, radical life enhancement.

"We are talking about making ourselves millions of times more intelligent and being able to have virtually reality environments which are as fantastic as our imagination."

Although possibly this is what Kurzweil's critics, such as the biologist PZ Myers, mean when they say that the problem with Kurzweil's theories is that "it's a very bizarre mixture of ideas that are solid and good with ideas that are crazy. It's as if you took a lot of very good food and some dog excrement and blended it all up so that you can't possibly figure out what's good or bad." Or Jaron Lanier, who calls him "a genius" but "a product of a narcissistic age". ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community

Reality-based community is an informal term in the United States, used to refer to people who base their opinions more on observation than on ideology or doctrine—that the people rely on their observation of reality instead of seeking to shape reality in the image of their plans. The term has been defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from judicious study of discernible reality." It can be seen as an example of political framing.

The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, "Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush," quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]

(And the colours, man, the colours!)

But a 'new and improved' 'apparent reality' which only you can perceive isn't actual reality, as is the cliff you walk over, thinking there's a lovely, unicorn-bespeckled bridge stretching all the way to Valhalla before you... In the real world, we term that 'delusional' in the notes we take, watching what they do, in our white coats and concern for the real, irreplaceable world and billion of years of evolution so mindlessly and pathologically destroyed by a few greed-blinded lunatics with no respect for reality itself.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/30/rise-of-robots-evil-a...

The rise of robots: forget evil AI – the real risk is far more insidious

It’s far more likely that robots would inadvertently harm or frustrate humans while carrying out our orders than they would rise up against us
Stuart Russell: ‘The risk doesn’t come from machines suddenly developing spontaneous malevolent consciousness.’

Olivia Solon in San Francisco

Tuesday 30 August 2016

When we look at the rise of artificial intelligence, it’s easy to get carried away with dystopian visions of sentient machines that rebel against their human creators. Fictional baddies such as the Terminator’s Skynet or Hal from 2001: A Space Odyssey have a lot to answer for.

However, the real risk posed by AI – at least in the near term – is much more insidious. It’s far more likely that robots would inadvertently harm or frustrate humans while carrying out our orders than they would become conscious and rise up against us. In recognition of this, the University of California, Berkeley has this week launched a center to focus on building people-pleasing AIs.

The Center for Human-Compatible Artificial Intelligence, launched this week with $5.5m in funding from the Open Philanthropy Project, is lead by computer science professor and artificial intelligence pioneer Stuart Russell. He’s quick to dispel any “unreasonable and melodramatic” comparisons to the threats posed in science fiction.

“The risk doesn’t come from machines suddenly developing spontaneous malevolent consciousness,” he said. “It’s important that we’re not trying to prevent that from happening because there’s absolutely no understanding of consciousness whatsoever.” ...

... He uses autonomous vehicles to illustrate the type of problem the center will try to solve. Someone building a self-driving car might instruct it never to go through a red light, but the machine might then hack into the traffic light control system so that all of the lights are changed to green. In this case the car would be obeying orders but in a way that humans didn’t expect or intend. Similarly, an artificially intelligent hedge fund designed to maximize the value of its portfolio could be incentivized to short consumer stocks, buy long on defence stocks and then start a war – as suggested by Elon Musk in Werner Herzog’s latest documentary.

“Even when you think you’ve put fences around what an AI system can do it will tend to find loopholes just as we do with our tax laws. You want an AI system that isn’t motivated to find loopholes,” Russell said.

“The problem isn’t consciousness, but competence. You make machines that are incredibly competent at achieving objectives and they will cause accidents in trying to achieve those objectives.”

To address this, Russell and his colleagues at the center propose making AI systems that observe human behavior and try to work out what the human’s objective is, then behave accordingly and learn from mistakes. So instead of trying to give the machine a long list of rules to follow, the machine is told that its main objective is to do what the human wants them to do. ...

... But if AI systems can be designed to learn from humans in this way, it should ensure that they remain under human control even when they develop capabilities that exceed our own.

In addition to watching humans directly using cameras and other sensors, robots can learn about us by reading history books, legal documents, novels, newspaper stories as well as by watching videos and movies. From this they can start to build up an understanding of human values.

It won’t be easy for machines. “People are irrational, inconsistent, weak-willed, computationally limited, heterogenous and sometimes downright evil,” Russell said. ...

What could possibly go wrong?

But at least they don't need humans anymore. (And the robots replacing life on the planet won't be thinking that they need them, either, lol.)

.. Then there’s Eatsa, the automat restaurant where no human interaction is necessary, which has locations popping up across California. ...

http://www.recode.net/2016/12/9/13903264/trump-robots-fast-food-workers-...

Robots are already replacing fast-food workers
Trump’s pick for labor chief, the CEO of Hardee's and Carl’s Jr., likes the idea.
by April Glaser@aprilaser Dec 9, 2016

Despite Donald Trump’s promise to create more jobs if elected president, his pick for labor secretary, Andy Puzder, the CEO of the fast-food chains Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s, is keen on the idea of replacing food service workers with robots.

Puzder told Business Insider earlier this year that unlike human workers, robots are "always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there's never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.”

And while the unsettling contradiction calls into question other campaign promises Trump made in the run-up to Election Day, the truth is that technology that replaces food service workers is already here. ...

... Then there’s Eatsa, the automat restaurant where no human interaction is necessary, which has locations popping up across California.

Delivery is on track to be automated, too. Starship’s ground robot delivered takeout in London earlier this month, and the company has plans to roll out in Silicon Valley soon. There’s also Marble and Dispatch; the later received $2 million in seed funding in a round led by Andreessen Horowitz earlier this year. Both Alphabet and Amazon hope to one day deliver by drone, too. ...

Lol, they glitch, need maintenance and eliminate those generally older/isolated humans going out to pick up food/coffee mainly to have human contact - and they can't deal with anything on a human level, or which they aren't programmed to deal with, such as a female customer being groped or harassed or a child bullied. Or anyone just shoving ahead in line, picking someone's pocket or walking off with their order.

Not that any but the very few would be able to afford to eat, period, once even these sorts of jobs are gone - who will these outlets serve and where will profits come from when we're all dead or dying and there's no way for even the able-bodied among the 99 & 1/2% to survive but by resorting to crime?

http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/09/technology/shervin-pishevar-california/i...

Tech founders want California to secede
by Seth Fiegerman @sfiegerman November 9, 2016:

https://www.fastcoexist.com/1678720/former-seasteaders-come-ashore-to-st...

Former "Seasteaders" Come Ashore To Start Libertarian Utopias In Honduran Jungle

Forgoing the plan to build independent floating cities away from chafing laws, some libertarians—led by Milton Friedman’s grandson, no less—have found something better: desperate countries willing to allow the founding of autonomous libertarian cities within their borders.

Greg Lindsay 10.31.11

The seasteader-in-chief is headed ashore. Patri Friedman (that’s Milton Friedman's grandson to you), who stepped down as the chief executive of the Peter Thiel-backed Seasteading Institute in August, has resurfaced as the CEO of a new for-profit enterprise named Future Cities Development Inc., which aims to create new cities from scratch (on land this time) governed by "cutting-edge legal systems." The startup may have found its first taker in Honduras, whose government amended its constitution in January to permit the creation of special autonomous zones exempt from local and federal laws. Future Cities has signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding to build a city in one such zone starting next year.

Seasteading, i.e. the creation of sovereign nations floating offshore, is enshrined in libertarian thought as an end-run around the constraints of stodgy nation-states. The idea has received plenty of (mocking) mainstream coverage, most recently in a Details profile of Thiel, in which Friedman outlined the new startup he had in mind:

One potential model is something Friedman calls Appletopia: A corporation, such as Apple, "starts a country as a business. The more desirable the country, the more valuable the real estate," Friedman says.

Future Cities follows this approach, describing its mission as bringing "Silicon Valley’s spirit of innovation to the implementation of cutting-edge legal systems in new cities," most likely in the role of the cities’ master developer. Citing laissez-faire entrepots such as Hong Kong and Singapore as examples, the company’s founders believe that strong property rights and business-friendly regulation are key to creating jobs, stimulating investment, and lifting millions out of poverty, a la China’s special economic zones. "The evidence is much stronger," Friedman replies when asked if he’s building another libertarian utopia, "that rule of law, fairness, and a lack of corruption leads to more economic growth than low taxes." (Not that they’re mutually exclusive, as Singapore demonstrates.)
"Rule of law, fairness, and a lack of corruption leads to more economic growth than low taxes."

Instead of seasteading, Future Cities is modeling itself on "charter cities." The brainchild of New York University economist Paul Romer (read his thoughts on FCI here), a charter city combines a host nation’s vacant land (in this case, Honduras) with the legal system and institutions of another (e.g. Canada) and residents drawn from anywhere. Romer’s central insight is that good governance is transplantable—rather than wait for a basket case nation to come around begging, a charter city could help show it the way, as Hong Kong did for Deng Xiaoping. ...

... One thing that seems certain is that the FCD’s interest in Honduras—the recent site of a coup, human rights abuses, and land seizures—will bring a fresh round of criticism to the charter city model. While Romer has been battling unflattering comparisons to colonialism since he first presented the idea, FCD’s sudden interest in Honduras reads like an epilogue to The Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein’s 2007 book tracing the checkered history of free market reforms in the wake of political crises (think 1970s Chile, 1990s Russia or 2000s Iraq). The Doctrine’s godfathers, in Klein’s telling, are Milton Friedman and his disciples in the University of Chicago’s economics department. Now it appears his grandson is offering to experiment with the legal system of one of Latin America’s poorest countries. ...

And the same holds true for America, in its carefully created crises. Nothing like the company store made into a 'legal state' ruling by corporate priorities and the standards of a pathological corporate culture - and absolutely uncontrollable regarding 'cost-cutting' pollution affecting other places and people or regarding unsafe products and inhumane procedures and laws.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/09/trump-win-california-...

Silicon Valley investors call for California to secede from the US after Trump win

Hyperloop co-founder said he would fund ‘Calexit’ campaign for Democratic state to become its own nation as tech industry has been at odds with Trump

Olivia Solon in San Francisco

Wednesday 9 November 2016

... The proposal illustrates the technology industry’s frustration with Trump over his repeated criticisms of Silicon Valley companies. The Republican leader wants Apple to stop making phones in China, thinks Jeff Bezos bought the Washington Post to exert political power and avoid paying taxes, and claimed that Mark Zuckerberg’s push for specialist immigration would actually decrease opportunities for American women and minorities.

Over the summer, 100 tech leaders signed an open letter warning that Trump would be “a disaster for innovation” and many others, including Bezos, have spoken out about his behaviour.

Trump’s lone public supporter in Silicon Valley was Facebook board member and PayPal billionaire Peter Thiel, and even he acknowledged that the country faced an enormous challenge. “We’re going to need all hands on deck,” he said in a statement to USA Today. “He has an awesomely difficult task, since it is long past time for us to face up to our country’s problems.”

Yeah, innovation cannot possibly occur without extreme exploitation of the most vulnerable groups and areas which can be accessed. Enormous profits are never enough...

However, this was a thing prior to the election:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/29/us/silicon-valley-roused-by-secession-...

Silicon Valley Roused by Secession Call

By ANAND GIRIDHARADASOCT. 28, 2013

NEW YORK — First the slave South, now this. Is Silicon Valley trying to secede from America?

That it is, and should, was the claim of a speech this month by a Stanford University lecturer and entrepreneur named Balaji S. Srinivasan. The speech gained attention in technology circles. But it deserves a wider audience, because it was an unusually honest articulation of ideas that are common among members of a digital overclass whose decisions shape ever more of our lives.

In a nutshell, Mr. Srinivasan, a computer scientist and co-founder of the genomics company Counsyl, told a group of young entrepreneurs that the United States had become “the Microsoft of nations”: outdated and obsolescent. When technology companies calcify, Mr. Srinivasan said, you don’t reform them. You exit and launch your own. Why not do so with America?

In practice, this vision calls for building actual communities that would be beyond the reach of the state that Silicon Valley’s libertarians despise. But in the near term, Mr. Srinivasan noted, there are piecemeal ways to opt out of the society — like spending unregulated digital currency, sleeping in unregulated hotels and manufacturing unregulated guns. What Mr. Srinivasan called “Silicon Valley’s ultimate exit,” he explained, “basically means build an opt-in society, ultimately outside the United States, run by technology.”

The speech won roars from the audience at Y Combinator, a leading start-up incubator. It earned hearty praise online as well — even as it worried others. ...

... Disruption makes enemies, Mr. Srinivasan said, but war is not an option: “They have aircraft carriers; we don’t.” His proposed solution is seceding from the society before the “backlash” against the Valley grows.

The tools are already here, he noted: 3-D printing makes it “impossible to ban physical objects,” from guns to drones. The borderless digital currency Bitcoin defies economic regulation. The Quantified Self movement helps people self-measure and opt out of the health care system. He urged his audience to invent opt-out tools of their own, including one “allowing people, the middle class, to make tax shelters.”

Mr. Srinivasan has influential support: Some of the biggest names in the Valley have variously proposed building a Mars colony, an unregulated zone of experimentation on Earth or floating libertarian islands at sea.

Not everyone in technology wants to flee, though. Catherine Bracy, director of community organizing at Code for America, criticized this genre of thinking as reflecting a simple lack of exposure by many Valley engineers: “Most of them aren’t confronted with or don’t have an understanding of most problems regular people are facing. If they had to collect food stamps or ride the bus or send their kid to public school, they might be more empathetic to the role that government plays in people’s lives and more interested in fixing those problems than opting out.” ...

The quantified self movement appears to be rather like... was it Christian Science, a belief that the body could not be ill, only mistaken? Only here tracking everything replaces the more traditionally religious element. I suppose that if you know you're being industrially poisoned, you can somehow overcome the effects by sheer will-power, or at least feel as though you're doing something in a situation in which no sane person can exert any control over the corporations nd billionaires running everything.

http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/science.htm

Christian Science
Christian or Cult?*

The movement known as Christian Science is a religion "emphasizing divine healing as practiced by Jesus Christ." It is officially known as The Church of Christ, Scientist (CCS) (with headquarters in Boston, Massachusetts), founded in 1879 by the much married Mary Baker Glover Patterson Eddy (1821-1910). It is one of the more sophisticated modern cults, attracting many intellectuals. Estimated membership was about 350,000 in the 1930s with approximately 2,500 branch churches, societies, and college organizations in more than 50 countries worldwide. Estimates suggest that membership has fallen to well under 100,000 at the present time. While the branches are democratic in government, they all conform to the rules laid down in Mary Baker Eddy's Manual of The Mother Church (1895); church affairs are now overseen by a self-perpetuating board of five people.

Under the leadership of Board of Directors Chairman Virginia Harris, the CCS has embarked on an aggressive, multi-faceted marketing program designed to mainstream itself and to attract new members. For example, the CCS is finding new ways to promote itself in light of our society's current interest in self-awareness, spirituality, mind/body connections, alternative medicine, and women's issues. The CCS's weekly magazine has been redesigned to include quotes from New-Age proponent Oprah Winfrey. Church representatives are also turning up at medical conferences and other places.

Mrs. Eddy was chronically sick growing up, with many ailments including paralysis, hysteria, seizures and convulsions. At 22, she married her first of three husbands, George Glover, who died within 6 months from yellow fever. Following Glover's death, she began to be involved in mesmerism (hypnosis) and the occult practices of spiritualism and clairvoyance (Ruth Tucker, Another Gospel, p. 152). Still ill, she married Daniel Patterson in 1853, a dentist and homeopathic practitioner. It was during this time she met mental healer Phineas P. Quimby (1802-1866), whose influence would shape her belief of Christian Science. Quimby believed that illness and disease could be cured through positive thoughts and healthy attitudes, by changing one's beliefs about the illness. She claimed that Quimby cured her; she suddenly improved, but later the symptoms returned (Another Gospel, p. 155).
After Quimby's death in 1866, Mrs. Eddy determined to carry on his work. She had developed a "psychic dependence" on Quimby, drawing on his spiritual presence, claiming even visitations by his apparition. Eddy "reached the scientific certainty that all causation rests with the Mind, and that every effect is a mental phenomena." Eddy took Quimby's teachings one step further, claiming that sickness, death, and even our physical bodies do not exist, but are only imagined. Based on this absurdity, Mary Baker Eddy formulated her unique interpretations of Scripture upon which Christian Science was founded (and recorded in Eddy's 1875 book, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. [HJB] (In 2001, the ten millionth copy of Science and Health was sold). In essence, Christian Science is a revival of ancient Pantheism. [Eddy later published 16 other books, including Retrospection and Introspection (1891), which tells of her own experience of discovering, practicing, and teaching the "science" of Christian healing.] [The CCS recently announced plans to build (at a cost of $25 million) the Mary Baker Eddy Library for the Betterment of Humanity. Scheduled to open in 2002 in Boston, the library will house over 500,000 unpublished documents and artifacts related to Mrs. Eddy. It will also allow the CCS to secure another 45 years of copyright protection for the writings under new U.S. copyright laws that take effect at the end of 2002. ...

http://quantifiedself.com/about/

About the Quantified Self

Our mission is to support new discoveries about ourselves and our communities that are grounded in accurate observation and enlivened by a spirit of friendship.

Quantified Self Labs is a California-based company founded by Gary Wolf and Kevin Kelly that serves the Quantified Self user community worldwide by producing international meetings, conferences and expositions, community forums, web content and services, and a guide to self-tracking tools. Are you interested in self-tracking? Do you have questions to ask or knowledge to share? We welcome your questions and contributions. We are here to help.

Here’s how to get involved: ...

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-quantified-self-movement?share=1

What is the quantified self movement?

3 Answers
Bob Troia, Hack. Track. Analyze. Optimize. Rinse. Repeat. aka QuantifiedBob.com
Written 9 Nov 2015
Wikipedia sums up the Quantified Self as:

...a movement to incorporate technology into data acquisition on aspects of a person's daily life in terms of inputs (e.g. food consumed, quality of surrounding air), states (e.g. mood, arousal, blood oxygen levels), and performance (mental and physical)... In short, quantified self is self-knowledge through self-tracking with technology. Quantified self-advancement have allowed individuals to quantify biometrics that they never knew existed, as well as make data collection cheaper and more convenient. One can track insulin and cortisol levels, sequence DNA, and see what microbial cells inhabit his or her body.

Something I would add to this definition is that the QS movement goes beyond just physical metrics - people in the QS community are using data to better understand and improve time management and productivity, personal relationships, and financial behavior/motivation/decisions.

The "movement" is a global community of people who are exploring, embracing, and sharing these techniques and tools. There are over 200 Quantified Self Meetups around the world, which culminates with two annual QS Conferences (one in the US - http://qs15.quantifiedself.com/, one in Europe - http://qseu.quantifiedself.com/). Attend a local Meetup and connect with other like-minded folks!

Gabriele Giordano, I started quantifying myself on the April of 2013
Written 3 Nov 2015
It is a very small group of people that find tracking pieces of their life intriguing because of their possible utility. It's a habit made possible by technology.
Some of us have the motto "I measure/I track, therefore I am."
There are some worries that some of us might have obsessive compulsive disorder.
In my case, if would stop my tracking and quantifying for some reasons, I would feel worried because data for me is awareness and consciousness.
83 Views · View Upvotes
Shashwat Pradhan, CEO & Founder of Emberify
Written 1 Feb

You can think of it as personal analytics, maybe Google Analytics for your life!
33 Views

(And Google will be tracking all of this right along with you, as, apparently, will be numerous learning machines studying you, so as to know more about you than you know yourself. As will Google. No, not intrusive at all, not like, for example, democratic government wanting you to register a gun or corporations to reveal what toxic chemicals are in your food and water, or anything.)

Hey, those disgusting non-billionaire poors are being cleared out of Silicone Valley prior to seceding! What a clever notion. Isn't it wonderful that housing prices are so high, said to be a good sign for the economy? (Not the real one, of course, but only reality-based poors need to worry about that.)

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/11/silicon-valley-housin...

Housing official in Silicon Valley resigns because she can't afford to live there

Even the lawyer and her software engineer husband can’t buy a home in the area due to the intensifying housing crunch that the tech boom has exacerbated
Kate and Steve Downing.

Sam Levin in San Francisco

Thursday 11 August 2016

Once Kate Downing and her husband Steve did the math, it was obvious that if they wanted to raise a family, staying in Palo Alto, California, was not an option. Although Steve, 33, works as a software engineer at a nearby Silicon Valley technology company and Kate, 31, is a product attorney at another tech firm, the cost of owning a home near their jobs has simply become too steep for them.

If they wanted to purchase their current house – which they rent with another couple for $6,200 a month total – it would cost $2.7m plus monthly mortgage and tax payments of $12,177, adding up to more than $146,000 a year.

Instead, the couple will soon relocate 45 miles south to Santa Cruz, a city by the beach where they can afford to purchase a home and eventually raise children.

The Downings’ housing struggle in the northern California region that is home to many of the world’s wealthiest tech companies carries a special irony due to Kate’s second job: up until this week, she served as a planning and transportation commissioner for Palo Alto – a position in which she pushed city officials to build more housing and pass pro-development policies that could help solve the growing affordability crisis. ...

... In Palo Alto, she said she was particularly worried about teachers, first responders and service workers being priced out of the city – and the entire region.

The fight over housing in Palo Alto, which is about 40 miles south of San Francisco, mirrors policy debates across Silicon Valley, which is home to the headquarters of Apple, Google, Facebook and other smaller tech startups that have attracted significant wealth and new jobs.

The housing supply, however, has not matched the resulting demand, and officials and researchers have increasingly recognized the dire consequences for low-wage residents. Some studies have shown that roughly 70,000 low-income workers in Silicon Valley now commute more than 50 miles to get to their jobs.

Between 2000 and 2013, the region lost 50% of units defined as affordable while the number of low-income households jumped by 10%, according to one study. Tech firms have worsened inequality, and in the shadow of the biggest companies, the region has seen mass evictions, expanding homeless encampments, and mobile home parks threatened with closure.

Analysts are now predicting that the housing crisis is going to have a serious impact on higher paid tech workers, potentially encouraging a sizable exodus. ...

... Joe Snider, a 31-year-old information technology analyst, left Palo Alto for Colorado and now works remotely for his company. He said he also supports fewer regulations and unrestricted housing development. ...

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/07/silicon-valley-larges...

'Largest-ever' Silicon Valley eviction to displace hundreds of tenants

Demolition of 216-unit complex is the latest example of rising income inequality in a region home to many of the world’s wealthiest technology companies

Sam Levin in San Jose, California

Thursday 7 July 2016

Iris Milano could hardly sleep after she got the news that her family would be kicked out of their two-bedroom apartment in San Jose.

“You’re always thinking and worrying. It’s something that is always with me,” said Milano, 47, a skin-care technician who lives with her husband and 14-year-old son in an apartment protected by rent control in the northern California city. “We are being forced to move. This is our home.”

Milano, who is originally from Venezuela and has lived in the area for 13 years, is one of roughly 670 tenants who are being displaced from their homes in what local housing advocates believe to be Silicon Valley’s largest-ever mass eviction of rent-controlled tenants.

The 216-unit complex called the Reserve Apartments that is being demolished to make way for a development of market-rate housing – located five miles away from Apple’s headquarters, 14 miles away from Google and 20 miles away from Facebook – is the latest example of rising income inequality in a region home to many of the world’s wealthiest technology companies.

Residents of the Reserve recently learned they would all have to move out by April of next year so that developers could move forward with construction of new housing that many of them will not be able to afford. ...

... Between 2000 and 2013, the number of low-income households in the Bay Area increased by 10%, but the region lost 50% of units defined affordable for this population, according to researchers at the University of Berkeley, California, who have closely studied gentrification and displacement.

Studies have also repeatedly shown that Silicon Valley tech firms are exacerbating inequality and that many local workers do not make enough to support a family.

The region that has one of the highest rates of homelessness in the country.

Amid this intensifying housing crisis, mobile home parks, large homeless encampments and other complexes that house vulnerable residents have faced increasing threats of closure and eviction. ...

... The lack of protections for tenants and an absence of local anti-displacement laws means that it’s entirely legal for Greystar to displace hundreds of residents and replace them with wealthier renters in the coming years.

“It’s been a tidal wave of displacement,” said Kyra Kazantzis, directing attorney of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, a local nonprofit. “We’ve seen increasing pressure on owners to sell and redevelop.”

Kazantzis said in her 24 years at her organization, she could not recall a larger single mass eviction than the Reserve case. A spokeswoman for the city of San Jose said officials believed it was the largest of its kind in the city.

But the city, like many municipalities in the region, encourages this kind of high-density development targeting higher incomes as part of its long-term plans to accommodate a swelling population and a rise in employment.

“This is one of our growth areas where we have plans to intensify residential and commercial development,” said Lesley Xavier, supervising planner for the city. “This is where San Jose is going to grow.” ...

... “I’m upset, because it took so long to find this apartment,” said Elena Gaytan, a 35-year-old Mexican immigrant.

(Her 15-year-old daughter, Grecia, who translated an interview, added: “I feel upset. My school is close and I don’t know where we will move.”)

“We put applications everywhere. But nothing is affordable,” said her stepfather Carlos Trinidad, a 43-year-old roofer.

The couple, who have three kids, pays $2,300 for their two-bedroom, and Trinidad said the stress of the eviction has been difficult to manage. “It’s too much pressure,” he said. “I try not to think too much about it.”

Gabriella Sandoval, a 27-year-old receptionist, said she and her husband, a painter, both grew up in San Jose and feel helpless in the wake of the planned demolition.

“Prices just keep going higher and higher,” she said. “There’s nothing we can do.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/sep/21/silicon-valley-evicti...

Low-income families face eviction as building 'rebrands' for Facebook workers

A Silicon Valley apartment complex wants to attract high-income tenants who work at top tech firms – but critics ask, what is the human cost?
Laura Hernandez and her three-month old daughter Kimberly are facing eviction from their home in Silicon Valley.

Sam Levin

Sam Levin in Redwood City, California

Wednesday 21 September 2016 11.00 BST

The recent eviction notice that Laura Hernandez and her husband received at their one-bedroom apartment in Silicon Valley did not say why they were being kicked out.

But executives at Trion Properties, a private equity firm that recently purchased their building, have made it unusually clear that they want a different kind of tenant – high-paid technology workers at the nearby headquarters of Facebook, which is planning a large campus expansion. ...

... Housing advocates say that throughout Silicon Valley, where income inequality is on the rise, real estate investors are increasingly purchasing centrally located apartments, remodeling them, removing low-income tenants en masse, and replacing them with wealthy tech workers. In many cases, the “house flipping” is entirely legal and occurs with little objection from local officials. ...

... The firm, in announcing the purchase of the 48-unit Buckingham Apartments, said that its goal was to “rebrand” and “revitalize” the property, raise the rents, and attract “young working professionals” employed at “Google, Facebook, and other Fortune 100 tech companies”.

“This is a blatant attempt to displace people,” said Salimah Hankins, senior staff attorney with Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, a nonprofit representing some of the evicted tenants. “This is all about a ‘great investment opportunity.’ There’s no understanding of the real human cost.”

Her organization has seen similar cases of displacement throughout Redwood City and in the neighboring cities of San Mateo and Burlingame. ...

... Numerous studies have shown that, although the region depends on low-wage service workers who support the tech economy, only the ultra-wealthy can afford to live near their jobs. In Silicon Valley, roughly 70,000 low-income workers now commute more than 50 miles to work.

In recent months, even well-off tech workers have publicly stated that they can no longer afford to live comfortably and raise families in northern California. ...

... Mass eviction cases, like a recent one in San Jose, considered the largest in the region, sometimes spark controversy. But it is the small-scale evictions happening on a daily basis that play a significant role in what has become a displacement crisis, said Miriam Zuk, project director of the University of California, Berkeley’s Urban Displacement Project.

Zuk said she now regularly sees direct evidence of the tech impact on housing, citing one case in which a property owner evicted a group of Latino residents to make way for “the laptop crowd”. In Oakland, where Uber is opening a new office, “everybody is now advertising housing in terms of its proximity to Uber,” she said. “It’s crazy how quickly that happened.” ...

... Eduardo Murillo, 40, said he lives with his brother and cousin in a one-bedroom and that they haven’t been able to find anywhere affordable in advance of their October eviction.

“We’re very stressed. Everyone deserves to have somewhere affordable.”

Mariana Jimenez, a 39-year-old tenant who lives with her brother and his two children, broke down crying while discussing their search for a new place before they are forced to leave in October.

“We are looking and making a lot of appointments … but it’s all very expensive,” said Jimenez, who works as a nanny. “Someone needs to help us.”

And in the meantime, it's really the billionaires who need help against law and the public!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/17/silicon-valley-vinod-kho...

Billionaire claims he has been harassed after blocking access to public beach

Silicon Valley venture capitalist Vinod Khosla sues two California agencies as part of protracted legal battle over public access to beach on his property
Martins Beach
Martins Beach. In California, all beaches are open to the public up to the ‘mean high tide line’, broadly defined as the portion of the beach where the sand is wet.

Olivia Solon in San Francisco

Monday 17 October 2016

Silicon Valley venture capitalist and billionaire Vinod Khosla, who has been engaged in a legal battle over public access to a beloved surfing beach that sits on his land, is suing two state agencies accusing them of using “coercion and harassment” to take away his private property rights – an allegation one campaign group describes as “absurd”.

Khosla, who has a net worth of $1.55bn, co-founded the technology company Sun Microsystems and now runs the venture capital firm Khosla Ventures. In 2008, he bought a 53-acre section of Martins Beach near Half Moon Bay, about 30 miles south of San Francisco.

In California, all beaches are open to the public up to the “mean high tide line”, broadly defined as the portion of the beach where the sand is wet.

To honor this, the previous owners of the land had given members of the public access to the beach via a private road, charging a fee for parking. It was a popular spot for fishing, picnicking and surfing.
Silicon Valley billionaire demands $30m to restore access to former public beach

When Khosla took over the property, he initially continued to allow public access, but in 2010 he closed the gate and painted over the billboard welcoming people to the beach. This prompted multiple lawsuits from campaign groups seeking continued access to Martins Beach and the introduction of new state legislation. ...

... The Deeneys wanted people to enjoy the beach and worked with local officials to make that possible, she said. Khosla is being treated differently than the Deeney family because he acted very differently – with “total disregard” for the public’s right to access and enjoy the beach.

“Martins Beach is part of the fabric of the community of Half Moon Bay and has been open for generations to the public,” said Howe.

“As San Francisco is becoming gentrified, you are getting a lot of money from Silicon Valley taking away public resources. This makes it especially offensive to the everyman.”

And small entrepreneurs making a (bare) living is something simply not to be tolerated! Surely these brilliant money-accumulators should be making their own law over these disgusting non-billionaire poors!

(Edited below, for removal of a duplicate sentence))
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/02/mark-woodward-faceboo...

I'll 'make their life miserable': tech CEO bullies low-income vendors by his home

The comments mark the latest example of a male tech CEO making aggressive, insensitive and tone-deaf remarks about people less fortunate than them
‘I would do whatever it took to make them leave. If that meant destroying some of their produce ... I would do that in a heartbeat,’ read Woodward’s Facebook post.

Sam Levin in San Francisco

Monday 2 May 2016

A Silicon Valley tech CEO has sparked backlash for comments slamming local fruit vendors, saying he would “make their life miserable” and “destroy” their produce if they were stationed near his house – making him the latest wealthy Californian entrepreneur to publicly rail against low-income people.

Mark Woodward, CEO of software company Invoca, published – and later deleted – a Facebook post saying that he would have no qualms about aggressively harassing unauthorized fruit sellers in his neighborhood if they got near his home.

I would go out there and make their life miserable. I would do whatever it took to make them leave. If that meant destroying some of their produce, or standing out there with signs to chase everyone away, Or just making them very uncomfortable, I would do that in a heartbeat.”

The comments were published on a public San Jose real estate page called Willow Glen Charm in response to an anonymous post complaining about fruit sellers. They mark only the latest example of a male tech CEO making aggressive, insensitive and tone-deaf remarks about people less fortunate than them. ...

... “I removed the statements because I realized bringing a nuanced conversation to a social forum where it could be taken out of context was not the best way to bring resolution to a serious, multi-faceted issue.”

Woodward’s comments come at as time when experts have increasingly raised concerns about the way tech firms have exacerbated income inequality, with low-income workers and people of color increasingly struggling to make ends meet in the northern California communities that are home to some of the wealthiest companies in the world.

In February, tech entrepreneur and startup founder Justin Keller wrote an open letter to the mayor and police chief of San Francisco, complaining that “wealthy working people have earned their right to live in the city” without passing by homeless people on a regular basis. “I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, and despair of homeless people to and from my way to work,” he wrote.

In 2015, startup CEO Greg Gopman landed in hot water after he ranted about the homeless, calling them “the lower part of society”, a “burden and liability” and “degenerates” who “gather like hyenas”.

Startup founder Peter Shih was forced to delete a Medium post he wrote in 2013 called 10 Things I Hate About You: San Francisco Edition, in which he complained about San Francisco having “some of the craziest homeless people” who don’t deserve money. ...

Obviously, these poors should not be allowed into Silicon Valley unless they travel in from their distant ghettos (without pointless, costly public transportation) to do any work for which robots have not yet been purchased. And if California only secedes, laws can be made to properly deal with them. And a wall, perhaps, to post heads on?

(Sticking this in, in view of the attempted global hostile corporate take-over of everything, while various industries/corporations seem to be attempting to take over control of individual areas. Countries, like people, are individuals, and businesses must choose whether they want to sell goods or not, rather than trying to control the people and countries. But the US should be a model to avoid.)

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/a-global-view-of-corporate-go...

Leadership
A Global View of Corporate Governance: One Size Doesn’t Fit All

Nov 20, 2002

Asia-PacificNorth America

“A poorly conceived [corporate governance] system can wreak havoc on the economy by misallocating resources or failing to check opportunistic behaviors,” states Wharton management professor Mauro Guillen in his paper, “Corporate Governance and Globalization: Is There Convergence Across Countries?”

Corporate scandals, like the alleged executive greed and accounting improprieties at energy giant Enron, have thrust corporate governance practices into the spotlight, illustrating the fundamental role they play in any economy.

But does corporate governance operate the same way in any economy? That has been a point of contention among academics and economists. Guillen writes that proponents of the so-called globalization thesis argue that cross-national patterns of corporate governance are converging or will converge on either the Anglo-Saxon shareholder-centered model found in the U.S. and the U.K., or some hybrid between the shareholder and stakeholder models typically found in Japan and Germany. ...

Need to get rid of all of these damn burdensome regulations messing with Those Who Matter, even with licensed-to-kill Henry Kissinger on the board!

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/13/theranos-regulators-t...

Theranos could be banned from running labs for two years, regulators warn

Blood-testing startup accused of not resolving issues found during inspection earlier this year that created ‘immediate jeopardy to patient health and safety’
Blood Testing
The laboratory’s allegation of compliance ‘is not acceptable’, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Jemima Kiss in San Francisco

Wednesday 13 April 2016

... A regulator’s inspection in January highlighted “immediate jeopardy to patient health and safety”, but Theranos has not resolved the issues raised, the letter claims. It addresses Theranos owners Elizabeth Holmes and Ramesh Balwani, and director Sunil Dhawan.

“We find that the statements made in the allegation of compliance and evidence of correction: 1) failed to adequately address the deficient practice cited; 2) are incomplete and failed to meet the criteria of acceptable evidence of correction; 3) do not ensure sustained compliance; and 4) show a lack of the CLIA requirements.”

It also said the laboratory’s allegation of compliance “is not acceptable”.

A spokeswoman confirmed that Theranos did receive a letter from CMS on 18 March and that the company is in ongoing communication with the regulator. “We did respond within the 10 day timeframe. We have been working with regulators for two weeks and hope that they will not impose sanctions. If CMS decides to impose sanctions it will be made public almost immediately.”

In October 2015, a detailed WSJ report claimed Theranos employees doubted the accuracy of its own tests, and the accuracy of its results have also been questions. Its technology claims to be able to perform blood tests but with a pinprick of blood, rather than a traditional blood draw.

Theranos was previously one of Silicon Valley’s most highly prized startups, raising $800m in investment that valued the firm at $9bn and with a board of directors that includes Henry Kissinger.

If only California was a separate country, with law made and enforced by the tech giants and billionaires! Sorta like now, only waaaaay more so.

And if you aren't a billionaire unconcerned about Social Security, UnEmployment Benefits, and Medicare (or some currently still-necessary labour expected to keep track of your pollutants and mood for Google study and self-quantification which is apparently somehow to do away with any or most need for health-care,) you shouldn't be there anyway. They don't need The People any more than did the DNC.

(Edited above to add a bracket gone MIA.)

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

sojourns's picture

They run on Windows XP? XP was probably Microsofty's best OS but it's still Microsofty. Wow.

I would have thought that all electronic voting machine would run on a unix/linux firmware OS.

That's how it should be. Open source to make it easy to see any unauthorized code changes. Firmware as opposed to standard OS because it's far more effort to flash a chip to make changes than it is to load a corrupt self-destructing module in a system files folder using a standard OS installation.

up
0 users have voted.

"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage

TheOtherMaven's picture

while Mightysoft has plenty of bucks to spend on "influencing" elections. One dollar, one vote, you know - that's the new rule.

up
0 users have voted.

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

sojourns's picture

edit: actually, they could make some money. A fair amount. You can charge even in the open source world. Just not gazillions.

up
0 users have voted.

"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage

Cassiodorus's picture

you might have caught her live videos. When the recount topic came up, guess who was the guest star on the video? If you guessed "David Cobb," award yourself a free carbon easement. On the other hand, when Ajamu Baraka was the guest star, the topic was "Black-owned cooperative businesses."

up
0 users have voted.

"there's something so especially sadistic about waving the flag of a country that you're actively destroying" -- Aaron Mate

and things like "don't tell me what Dr. King said" are all part of the same theme: couching the debate in terms that make concern about working class the same as concern about the white working class, and therefore about racism by definition.

They are meant to shut down discussion, not to engage in it. It's also almost always someone in my age cohort (just under 40) or older, if you've noticed. Not always, but much of the time. There was a deep divide by age in communities of color during the primaries.

What these older folks don't seem to get is that millennials simply aren't constrained by systemic racism and sexism in the same way we gen-X and boomers were. It's still there--personally I don't believe our society will ever be entirely free of racism or sexism--but folks that are just a few years younger than me have a completely different view of how these things impact society. They're generally much more tolerant, open to other cultures and ideas, and generally not racist or sexist in the same numbers as my generation and older.

But, instead of allowing the modern generation of younger folks to address the issues that affect all of us, including the pernicious and deadly racism that affects people who aren't white at the same time, these folks pushing the "class concern is racist" narrative want those deadly issues of racism to supersede any others, and viciously attack any approach that doesn't put their issues first (and, in some cases, as the sole set of issues to care about). I understand the sentiment. I lived, grew up, witnessing just how differently I was treated compared to my peers (who weren't white). But that is, frankly, almost as alien a view toward the younger generation as explicit, open racism is. It makes me sad to see this kind of divide. We have (or, perhaps, had) an opening to finally treat everybody in the working class with the same respect and concern about our (economics, racism, sexism, all are "our" issues, one way or another). Folks like the author of the article that is the subject of this essay do more to close that window than to take advantage of it.

Very nice essay, by the way.

up
0 users have voted.

The blue collar black men and women I worked with were primarily concerned with job security, better wages, and retirement security in that order. Medical security was not an issue for any of us because we had the best of employer plans, FEHB.

There were concerned with racism too, of course, but economics was foremost and we all stood together there. Our local union officials were a mix of races/sexes because we wanted the best man/women representing us.

But the Democrats would divide us to satisfy their Wall Street paymasters.

EDIT: Will the DNC approach even work? How many black men or women are willing to suffer economically just to stick it to Whitey? I found them to be even more practical than my white co-workers, some of whom agonized over the poor rich people and their inheritance tax or "the unborn".

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Unabashed Liberal's picture

that I think it's probably fair to mention that minorities have very strong job protections built into the Civil Service merit system, unlike many workers in private industry, or, in many instances, workers in state and local government systems.

Of course, this will likely not be true much longer, since the VA 'Choice' Act of 2014 opened the door to dismantling many vital employee protections (regarding firing, demotions, suspensions, etc.). Naturally, addressing the VA SES employees was only 'the Camel's nose under the tent'--legislation is currently pending approval (or, has already passed--I've not been able to follow up as closely as I would have liked), which will erode the protections of all VA personnel.

And, the natural course of things means that these new 'rules' will extend to all federal employees--in time.

Mollie


“I believe in the redemptive powers of a dog’s love. It is in recognition of each dog’s potential to lift the human spirit and therefore– to change society for the better, that I fight to make sure every street dog has its day.”
--Stasha Wong, Secretary, Save Our Street Dogs (SOSD)

The SOSD Fantastic Four

Available For Adoption, Save Our Street Dogs, SOSD

Taro
Taro, SOSD

up
0 users have voted.

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

They blamed the workers for management's sins.

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Thanks for this comment. Agree completely! My hopes are with the younger generation. And yes, race (and gender) must be central issues to the Democratic Party ... along with class. I don't think identity politics are bad in themselves, I just think they shouldn't be put ahead of basic economic issues.

up
0 users have voted.

They are being used as a substitute for economic equality.

up
0 users have voted.

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Anja Geitz's picture

For doing what I can't bring myself to do, which is read their self interested mental masterbatory version of journalism. Instead, I can come here, read your interpretation of it, along with a trenchant point by point rebuttal of it, and not have my head explode.

The takeaway?

He concludes with a vague statement about the need to create a coalition by giving Americans a common goal—a message and a platform—that they can rally around. He simply avoids saying what that common goal and message will be, because the answer is economics. That’s the only answer, but he can't bring himself to say it because it undermines everything he's written.

You should be compensated in some way for that one. How do you feel about apple pies? Smile

up
0 users have voted.

There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier

Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

and believers of their own Fake News that Hillary was both inevitable and invincible.

I think that they were terrified that Bernie would make inroads in the African American voter bloc which HRC lost once before to Obama. IMO they got started early with their bizarre "Bernie doesn't appeal to black voters" bit in an effort to make it a self-fulfilling prophesy, although there was no reason Bernie shouldn't have appealed to black voters. Then that was followed up by a more assertive campaign that Bernie's followers themselves were a bunch of racist, sexist, college educated white elitist liberals (anyone else think that is just a complete symphony of cognitive dissonance?) in the effort to stigmatize them as Bernie Bros, which was nothing but a version of "deplorable" deployed against their own potential future voters! Another high point of moronic reasoning was the one promoted by Kos that an old white guy didn't have the moral authority to lead a societal or voter revolution.

Honestly, I have never witnessed such a f-ed up campaign with so many nonsensical and idiotic tropes, compounded by what I call their "Elephant Man" strategy wherein HRC was hidden away from the press and the public as much as it was possible to do so.

And to this day in Hillary World only voter ignorance, sexism and racism can explain the rejection of the American public for a flawed candidate running a terrible campaign. It couldn't be anything like their own lack of understanding about how the Electoral College works, could it? Nah. . . .

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

up
0 users have voted.

Beware the bullshit factories.

Pluto's Republic's picture

…the uneasy strangeness that many have not experienced before.

Honestly, I have never witnessed such a f-ed up campaign with so many nonsensical and idiotic tropes, compounded by what I call their "Elephant Man" strategy wherein HRC was hidden away from the press and the public as much as it was possible to do so.

There are two things than continue to trouble me. One is the "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" experience that so many here have described. Democrats and fellow travelers — folks that people here have known and shared themselves with online, daily, for years and years — were abruptly replaced by impostors. Their personalities were wiped and replaced with manufactured "units" with no ability think critically or to feel empathy. Their minds were flash-frozen with information that was 100 percent wrong. And they were ugly about it. We watched them walk off a cliff and and pull the country behind them.

When has that happened before? Sure, the wrong guy won in the past, but people's personalities did not flatline in such a creepy way. This experience in RL, among family and friends, has silenced people.

Two, I find it troubling that I cannot remember a time when blacks have been socially devolved by an election. Doubly so. And there was no discussion about the reverse course of the gains and possibilities they were building on. They were tokenized and betrayed by the very people they blindly trusted. And then tokenized again to explain the defeat:

And to this day in Hillary World only voter ignorance, sexism and racism can explain the rejection of the American public for a flawed candidate running a terrible campaign.

As this plays out, it is going to leave a cultural mark.

up
0 users have voted.

____________________

The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato
Jazzenterprises's picture

why I am currently leaning towards building a new Party, as opposed to reforming the old one. I am also on the fence about the Green Party... but I am very open to their message, but I do question their strategy. The next 2 years will be very interesting.

Yes, we will be smeared into eternity because we are at this point almost diametrically opposed on too many issues. Not to mention watching Democrats lining-up to make the same mistakes (neoliberalism or bust) in 2018-2020 and into the great beyond.

They want to keep all the corporate money pouring in, we don't. It is the root of all our problems imho.

Great diary.

up
0 users have voted.

Progressive to the bone.

WoodsDweller's picture

is a very clever construct. The reality is that the only privilege is class, in fact it's the definition of class. The constant repetition of "white privilege" obscures the fundamental issues of class to try to paint contemporary issues as race issues. Racial issues certainly exist, but 99% of the issues that the 99% have are class issues.

To rephrase an old joke:

A rich Democrat, a black working class guy, and a white working class guy are sitting at a table with 40 cookies on it. The rich Democrat takes 39 cookies. Then, in a bold new political direction, he leans over to the black working class guy and whispers "don't look now, but that white guy is trying to take your cookie".

When a rich Republican does this, he whispers to the white guy. That makes him an evil racist.

My new slogan: "Cookies for everybody".

up
0 users have voted.

"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone

Cassiodorus's picture

The problem with calling it "white privilege," however, is to allow the nice "antiracist" neoliberals over at Daily Kos to pick up on some small-time matter of etiquette in political conversations while ignoring the real white privilege, as multiple generations exposed to slavery/ Jim Crow/ economic racism have left as progeny multiple Black communities with next to nothing in net worth and a misleadership class keeping them in tow when it comes to voting for neoliberal Democratic Party candidates.

Remember, once upon a time, the antiracist goal used to be called "integration," and the bad reality was called "segregation"? Well nowadays segregation is worse than it was in the Sixties, but nobody talks about that anymore.

up
0 users have voted.

"there's something so especially sadistic about waving the flag of a country that you're actively destroying" -- Aaron Mate

There absolutely is white privilege. I agree with you! I just think you can't fix it easily, and can't fix it at all if you play races against one another. You have to create common ground. I think we're on the same page!

up
0 users have voted.

Got a good chuckle out of the joke! So true!

up
0 users have voted.
Amanda Matthews's picture

responsible for most of the greed and hardship that is afflicting people all over the America. This guy's working for the people who cannot stand seeing anybody, not a white person or black person, no Native American or Eastern/Far Eastern/Middle Eastern person, who isn't a member of their 'club', have any rights whatsoever. No human rights, no civil rights, no right to economic security, none, because everything of worth is the exclusive property of those who keep telling pushing this bullshit that all whites, regardless of class, are a bunch of pathetic, selfish, disgusting racists who are only concerned with OUR own white well-being and are standing on the backs of all minorities to live this lavish and 'privileged' lifestyle. All whites but them, of course. They're actually looking out for minorities when they look out of the windows of those Wall Street ivory towers, protecting them from the rest of the white racist/sexist/bigots that constitute the rest of ***White Amurika***.

The REAL problem for TPTB is that we (all races/genders/political persuasions) haven't fallen in line and acquiesced to our new role as serf and cannon fodder to our 'corporate' overlords. So they HAVE to keep us at each other's throats. Just think what a pain in the ass 'we' could be if 'we' actually got together and confronted the REAL racists and elitists who are actually pulling all our strings?

And people who write garbage like this are parasitic life forms. They suck the life out of everyone who believes this crap and who suffers because they can't see past the propaganda. They do the dirty work for those whose best interests are served when we are divided and angry and unorganized. The elite have their shit together, they have a plan that has worked since before recorded history, the powerful and those with the most 'wealth' have always known how to manipulate the masses. The names and faces of the guys/gals at the top of the heap may change from time to time, but the concept is still the same. Divide and conquer. Play on our anger and our fear and our pain. And to use despicable amoral tools like this guy to be the public face associated with their finger pointing. They're misery pimps for the 1%.

up
0 users have voted.

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

I remember reading in one of Matt Taibbi's books on the financial crisis he mentioned that in reality any "party fight" in this country should really be between the 300 million angry indebted credit card owners against the 10 million bankers/Corps/vampire squids who've indebted so many and sucked the life out of this country. If that battle ever got fought the 300 million would win. I'm paraphrasing it but you obviously get the gist. The LAST thing they want is for us to be united, they'll pit the young against the old, black against white, women against men and vice versa, but they'll never mention that big elephant in the room - economics and class. Nope, those two are not for us to worry our empty racist little heads about.

up
0 users have voted.

Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur

orlbucfan's picture

education over decades, b) buy up as many public megaphones (radio and boob tube) over the same time period. The FRWnutjobs knew what they had to do. Political defeats at first? No problem. They just doubled up on their efforts, and had plenty of patience. tRump horrow show is just a culmination of those efforts. Rec'd!!

up
0 users have voted.

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

ggersh's picture

Hermann Goering – The People Can Always Be Brought to the Bidding of the Leaders
“Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship…
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
– Hermann Goering (as told to Gustav Gilbert during the Nuremberg trials)

up
0 users have voted.

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

for lack of patriotism. We're the dam patriots.

All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country

up
0 users have voted.

Beware the bullshit factories.

ggersh's picture

up
0 users have voted.

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

orlbucfan's picture

up
0 users have voted.

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

Five stages of Dem grief:

1. Anger
2. Denial
3. Angry denial
4. Denial
5. Anger

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

This is one of the best essays I have read in a while. The vox article is so reeking of elitist disdain for real people (not just white people), but real people with real problems, all of which would be solvable if the Democratic party would break its addiction to big money. The excuses for Hillary Clinton, the very embodiment of corrupt neoliberalism, not winning are being made everywhere except where they belong and that is upon a horrible candidate representing a political party that has no message, only identity politics. These are the very same people who took large groups of voters for granted and were dependent upon demographics for wins.

In the end with everything else being equal, people will vote their wallets above anything else. Identity politics does not pay the bills or put food on the table, something the elitists in the Democratic party seem to ignore. I never thought I would say this, but the Democratic party needs to go the way of the Whigs. They are useless, hopelessly corrupt, and arrogant toward the very voters they need.

Thank you for this most excellent essay. You hit the proverbial nail squarely on the head.

up
0 users have voted.

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

that should be repeated as much as possible. So easy for them from their bubble to dismiss real people's concerns, a perfect definition.

up
0 users have voted.

Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur

Big Al's picture

up
0 users have voted.

So like many a Bernie supporter I was regaled with the accusations of being racist, sexist, etc.

After Hillary won the nomination, I thought she would chose an African American or Hispanic as her running mate. First, more than any groups, African Americans and Hispanics were critical for her winning (aside from the cheating). I thought she would solidify the "identify coalition" in this way. Second, there was the matter the succession of leadership in the party. By appointing a younger person of color/gender, she would handed the leadership and White House to the VP, also ensuring the identity coalition.

So when Hillary chose Kaine I thought first what bullshit. She chose a guy that represented everything her supporters complained about with Bernie and his supporters. I thought at the time Hillary was in trouble as the Kaine choice could hurt turnout among particularly African Americans. And in a way which democrats refused to talk about, this was a slap in the face of her minority and female supporters. And from the numbers I have been seeing, African American turnout in some key states was lower for Hillary compared to Obama.

Some people think the VP pick does not matter. Well, in this case I suspect it did. The Clinton's have always used black people in cynical and ugly ways--maybe this time they undid themselves with it.

up
0 users have voted.