Today's lesson
1. Capitalism is
inherently competitive and produces vast inequities. Capital flows upward.
2. Democracies--at least the functional kind, in theory--are predicated on the fundamental equality of their citizens, each of whom has a potentially equitable say in the collective good.
3. The basic job of a government--its
raison d'etre, the fundamental premise under which we give our "consent"--is to provide greater stability than individuals can achieve independently.
4. Our government is currently using our collective wealth to bail out private corporations, NOT so as to protect the small shareholders or prevent further foreclosures, but to maintain the obscene wealth accruing to the richest people in the nation. Why is it okay--even desireable--to "rescue" irresponsible corporations, AND simultaneously "infantilizing" to "rescue" the most vulnerable victims of corporate greed? If only we could borrow a page from Japan, where disgraced and overpaid CEOs routinely commit suicide when their corporate misdeeds are exposed? I'm only sort of kidding.
Your assigned reading? Naomi Klein's
new book. Just don't buy it from a giant mega-chain bookstore.
As you were, everyone.
Labels: fed up, politics: a dangerous game
Queens never negotiate
(Or so says the license-plate holder I saw yesterday. I suspect that Elizabeths I and II, among others, would disagree, but I like the sentiment. I have a notepad that says, "It's good to be queen.")
Joe Biden, huh? I'm going to need to process that one for a little while.
Labels: politics: a dangerous game
You* disappoint me
(* In the generic, impersonal, collective, of course--to "my fellow Americans").
After the giddy excitement of the early days of this presidential campaign, I'm feeling nothing but bitterness. Bitter at the unbridled and mostly unremarked misogyny of the coverage--from all sides--of Hillary Clinton, and of the indifference, apparently, of all but that "mature white feminist" demographic over whom she has an unshakeable sway, who are able to identify with her in recognizing that yes, this is, in fact, misogyny, even when inflected by anti-Clintonism, anti-Hillary-ism, etc., and who therefore understand that misogyny will not be overcome by wearing a t-shirt that says "Boy Toy" or "Look but don't touch."
I'm bitter that Obama's mispronunciation of a historical site--however important--is a "top headline" while we are still at war against...who? While children still go hungry in this country. While we challenge each other's patriotism based on stupid measures like stickers, car art, and jewelry, instead of demanding that patriotism mean something more, like willing to work with and for your fellow citizens to make the country better for everyone, not just yourself. I'm bitter that various pundits can announce without even blinking that white southerners won't vote for a black man, and that somehow that's okay, instead of being a national tragedy. I'm not convinced that racism of that sort is more than superficial, or that a talented speaker with Obama's energy can't go a long way toward getting the electorate to look past the foolish old "red" herring of race--that is, that poor whites and urban blacks have nothing to gain by recognizing their role as road-kill from the juggernaut of American capitalism. I'm not underestimating the visceral reality of racism, but I just don't believe that most people are stupid enough to hang onto hatred against their own self-interest. A few people, on all sides, sure.
And I'm really sad that the optimism was so short-lived, and that the cynics were so eager to attack from all sides.
Labels: politics: a dangerous game
Letter to Santa
Okay, not really.
Dear Barack,
Can I call you Barack? I mean, you've been emailing me for months now, and while I am hardly your most generous campaign donor, I
do have a sign in my window, which has to create a certain intimacy, right? I mean, technically, you're kind of on the porch, rather than in the house, but all my previous candidates have had to live outside on the lawn, where they were frequently the targets of bored teenagers and, apparently, some sort of low-flying domestic eggs that live around here. So really, I think I've made some strides toward cementing our relationship. I know, I still take Hillary's calls; she's so damned persistent, and even when I don't like what she's saying, I have to say that I have been generally impressed by her during this campaign: her tenacity, her articulateness, her utter indefatigability, her poise...pretty much everything except her husband, her forays into race-baiting and--oh yes--her actual policies. Did I ever tell you than my husband and his dad once won "Most Indefatigable" in a sailing race? According to my husband, his father was mortified by that--it being, of course, far, far better to win or lose than to be honored for not knowing the difference.
I know, I'm off topic. My students tell me that all the time. Deal with it. And by the way, I don't ever write Hillary
back; it's just that I feel bad shutting her completely out of my life. I feel bad when I see her being all brave and noble and articulate on TV in places like West Virginia. I feel
really bad that she seems to feel she has already earned the nomination, and how she can't seem to let go of where she thought she was--a shoo-in--before you appeared on the scene. Let me be clear: I feel bad for her personally, which is not at all the same as feeling bad that she appears spectacularly unlikely--barring corruption and backdoor-politicking that would make even a Karl Rove blush--to win the nomination. I feel bad that the next time she and Bill fight, he gets to do the "nyah, nyah, nyah--I was president and you're not!"
Anyway, Barack, can I just ask you, now that you appear likely to be the nominee, to please
not blow it? I support you because I think you are strong, amazingly articulate, and smart enough not to blow it, but we Democrats, you know, have been burned so much. Everyone wants to concentrate on "the race thing," but I think that's less of a threat, ultimately, than the ease with which the other side is going to paint you as a (gulp) intellectual, an elitist. Now you need to be folksy, without allowing them too easily to dismiss you as "too fake" (Al Gore in his plaid shirt) or "too [black]-folks-y," which is offensive, I know, but sadly true. I think you can do it; you are one of the first genuinely public voices to find even a rhetorical way out of the racial shark tank we have created for ourselves. I hope you are holed up somewhere, even now, trying to find a way to appeal to those "white, blue-collar" voters (does that make them pastel?) Hillary's been gunning for. Figuring out whom you can add to the ticket without playing too readily into the Republican strategy. Someone like John Edwards, who seems to me to be the only candidate (okay, barring Kucinich) who really cares about the effects of our incredible and growing income/opportunity/safety-net/culture gap in this country, and how our alienation could kill democracy. Or some other female politician--sorry I can't name any at the moment--who can affect a drawl or a twang with some sincerity, while drawing out those feminists who so rejoiced in Hillary's successes.
Please, Barack. We're counting on you.
Labels: politics: a dangerous game
