In short the Democrats couldn't organize a beer party among drunks never mind organize anything as passionately driven as a fascist movement! The Liberals are already neutered so all you demagogue lovers can relax.
I think Edward Mandell House already did a number on the party over a hundred years ago, it's had always been a little late for them to embrace socialism, what did the author of that truthdig article expect?
Personally, when I was at school, both Noam and Ralph influenced my thought greatly, I am forever indebted to them both. Truly, they are both great American heroes and priceless national treasures. But in the finally analysis, they are both stateists. Noam was educated by compulsory state schools, albeit, with a psychological profile of an outsider. And he was schooled at state Universities. Ralph was educated as a Progressive elite stateist, and believes big government is good. He was also schooled at state Universities as well.
The Atlantic Monthly, calling Nader one of the hundred most influential Americans in history, said, "He made the cars we drive safer; thirty years later, he made George W. Bush the president."[1]
John Rensenbrink, editor of Green Horizon Quarterly, stated, "[Nader] doesn't want to be a Green, he runs with his coterie rather than party organizers, he doesn't involve local Green leaders and he doesn't get the racial issue. I fear if Nader runs, he'll drag down every other Green in this country."[2]
One can't help but get the impression that the corporatocracy has also manipulated Mr. Nadar to meet their own needs in placating the far left. . . that wonderful truthdig article being no exception.
I liked this article from truthout. The interviewer really shines a bright light on either Noam's short comings, on what he refuses to be bluntly honest about, or just how much a pie in the sky idealist he can sometimes be. . . but then, most stateists have an addiction to the finer things in life that those who occupy the higher positions in the corporatocracy usually have. If people like Ralph and Noam called a spade a spade when the Federal Reserve and IRS were made, or when the Kennedy's were shot, or when 9/11 happened, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess now? But they know what happens to people of their caliber and influence who speak out on these issues when the
time comes. They have continued to enjoy their position in society too much to seriously lend their clout to these issues. Is this why Ralph never really cooperated effectively with the grass roots Green political organization? One perhaps will never know. :shrug:
(
I admire how wonderfully diplomatic Noam always is though.)
Chomsky: "The Business Elites ... Are Instinctive Marxists"
Friday 19 November 2010
by: Keane Bhatt, t r u t h o u t | Interview (NC is Noam)
. . .
Acclaimed philosopher and activist Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor Emeritus of Linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He shared his perspectives on international affairs, economics and other themes in an interview conducted at his office in Boston on September 14, 2010.
KB: I'd like to conclude our interview on the topic of Haiti, by bringing up your point about lessons that the Haitian Lavalas movement has for US progressives and activists when we last we spoke. You said, "It's quite striking that we and other western countries can't reach, can't even approach, can't even dream about the level of democracy they had in Haiti. That's pretty shocking. Here's one of the poorest countries in the world. The population that organized to win that election is among the most repressed and impoverished in the world; they managed to organize enough to enter the electoral arena without any resources and elect their own candidate." Praising Bolivia at the same time, you asked, "Is it believable that we can't do the same? … We can take lessons from them. Anything they've done we can do a thousand times more easily."
I've been thinking about the conditions in the U.S., which you call an "organizer’s dream," and I'd like to share some tentative thoughts on why this isn't the case. One: The US poor have much more to lose, materially, than their Haitian and Bolivian counterparts, and that may be a strong inhibitor to active, defiant engagement. Two: Perversely, being fired on by the [Haitian paramilitary group] FRAPH or by Goni's security forces may bring the righteousness of the cause into sharper relief, whereas the subtler mechanisms in the U.S. that mask agency – for example, social exclusion, being passed over for a promotion, etcetera - tend to be effective in dissuasion and atomization. Three: The suburbanization of the U.S. has undermined a collective life that Haitians and Bolivians enjoy. Four: US industrialization was shown to decrease political participation. It also necessitated internal demand, hence a powerful public relations apparatus to peddle "created wants" and atomize the population. I suspect that the populations in Bolivia or Haiti haven't been propagandized deeply, or indoctrinated into believing that they can't control their own affairs. Your thoughts?
NC: We’re kind of talking past each other. What you say is certainly true: we're not doing it. Since we're not doing what they've been doing in Port-au-Prince or Cochabamba, there must be a reason for it. Maybe the reasons you give, maybe others. But what I was talking about is something different. We have the opportunity and the privilege to do such things, and we're not doing them. So we should ask why, because we can. We're not going to face the forces of FRAPH and Goni. And it's not obvious that the poor are going to lose, they may gain. If you have a union struggle, for example, the people in the union struggle may lose, but they're doing it because they're driven by notions of solidarity with others and concern for the future. So if the kinds of ideas and commitment and so on developed that will enable us to use the opportunities which we in fact have, which are far beyond what they have, then we can achieve a lot.
I really enjoyed you're posts Lucy.
This last part is for RenaissanceMan, not that you will listen to anyone that isn't on Clear Channel, i.e., Glen Beck, Rush, Hannity, et. al., however, I live in Michigan, and it is a state with the second worst economy in the Union. Here is a video from a man in Flint, a very hard hit town. Someone who can see trough Obama, and is begging his community to see through Obama. He has less education, but more clarity of vision than either Noam or Ralph.
Check it out.
George Carlin -"Who Really Controls America"
Alex Jones - The Two Party Dictatorship
The President ain't nothin but the manager of BURGER KING!
The republican and democratic stateists all only care about more control, their positions in society, and passing more laws, that's what they are paid to do. They don't really care about the people, it doesn't pay to, and won't advance their careers.
"Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws.”
~Baron M.A. Rothschild
G Edward Griffin Creature From Jekyll Island Second Look at the Federal Reserve[3]
[1]^ "The Top 100: The Most Influential Figures in American History". Atlantic Monthly. December 2006. p. 62. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200612/influentials.
[2]# ^ http://www.thenation.com/article/ralph-redux
[3]http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm
