Gore and Sheehan Join Forces, NOT

Does Marie Cocco actually get paid to write her essays, like "Gore and Sheehan Join Forces."?? Good title. About two-thirds of the way through I thought, hey, good writer. I'm still reading this thing, 'cuz I want to see how they're joining forces. Sorry. Come to find out, they're not. It was just a fluff piece, with conventional (read incorrect) wisdom, like the following, to which I replied.

Eventually these peculiar dark ages will end. We can only hope historians see them as an aberration, not an early marker of decline.

Unfortunately, the history is already being written; we're in decline. Here's a contemporary example with references to someone documenting this decline. Former CIA consultant Chalmers Johnson is another who is documenting it.

Watch the real estate situation unravel this summer. Congress will try to save it, placing the burden on future tax-payers (so much for a "free" market in which bad business decisions are allowed to play out). We've seen it before in the same way the S&L double-scandal was swept under the rug. The twin debts will grow. Eventually, foreigners will diversify out of dollars, more so than they are already, and the US will decline like Spain and Britain did. The "hope" is that the US will do so with grace rather than a holocaust.

Cindy Sheehan: Moving on and Up

Cindy gets it. Our so-called "democracy" is corrupted by the corporate military industrial congressional complex. Yes. Eisenho original farewell address included the word "congressional" before it was removed. His words are worth repeating, and have been added at the end of this entry.

Cindy gets it, as did some researchers who published in Foreign Affairs. Their conclusion? The United States does not practice democracy. It is an imperial force in the world, driven by commercial and material goals at the expense of human needs. The transition is so deep, encompassing the vast majority of the mass communications media, that only external forces can correct the situation.

I posted several comments on other web sites, over the Memorial Day weekend, in response to reading Cindy Sheehan's "resignation letter." The gist? It seems that Cindy is moving on from the peace movement to the justice movement. My commentary is that we CAN wait for peace, because justice is a priority.

If anyone wants an answer to, "what's next?" it is provided by the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD). If you're serious about change, then you should read through the POCLAD research, which is laid out to some degree in a 10-part self-study program compiled by the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (it's a misnomer... they're all about Justice ;-) Their program is entitled "Challenge Corporate Power, Assert the People's Rights."

The three-part activist strategy is worth repeating (Dave Henson gets credit for this):

1) Devote some time to deep, multi-generational struggles, like freeing slaves, women's suffrage, and revoking corporate power.

2) Devote some time to fighting the immediate struggles, like humanitarian relief, saving historical artifacts from destruction, and key legislative battles.

3) Devote some time to developing alternative social structures (solutions to the problems), like alternative economic frameworks, alternative governance and electoral frameworks, and exploring means of positive cultural change.

Excerpt from Eisenhower's Farewell Address

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

No Honeymoon with the Democrats

Steve Benen, of the Carpetbagger Report, wrote a good critique showing there was "No Honeymoon" between CNN and Democrats even before Democrats took power.

It stuck me as paradox. I agree with Benen's critique, yet I also feel it's appropriate that there be "No Honeymoon with Democrats." I feel that the stakes are so high, and the issues are so time-sensitive and fluid, we need to hold their feet to the fire immediately. I'll say a bit more on this after addressing the apparent paradox.

Honeymoons are defined between two amicable partners who are celebrating a union. So, it isn't appropriate to apply the term to the Democratic leadership and the corporate media. Upon reflection, I was agreeing with the Carpetbagger's critique of CNN's misuse of their FCC license, not the notion of a truncated honeymoon. Yet there's nothing new in Benen's critique, just another example of many. Cable TV's abuses of their privilages are actually far worse than most people think, as documented in Jeff Cohen's "Cable News Confidential."

The paradox is resolved by recognizing that Cable TV and the Democratic leadership don't have a relationship that could involve a honeymoon; however, the voting public, who helped bring the Democrats to power, could have a honeymoon.

Some people, about 70 activists including Cindy Sheehan who shouted down Democrat Rahm Emanuel the day Democrats took power, feel "no" honeymoon is appropriate at this time. An aside, I felt Barbara O’Brien, of Mahablog, carried on longer than necessary questioning the wisdom of Cindy Sheehan's demonstration directed toward Emanuel. Scroll Down to see the Thread. My primary criticism of O'Brien's perspective, that Sheehan's tactics were unconstructive, is that Sheehan is a symbol defined in great part by the corporate media. Focusing a critique on Sheehan plays into the corporate media framing of the peace movement, and isn't fair to Sheehan.

Back to the subject of justifying "No Honeymoon with Democrats." I'll be brief, recognizing more could be said. First, the Democratic leadership are part of the Discredited American Political Elite. Our society is sick and disfunctional. Democrats operate in a context of disfunction so deeply rooted in our culture that even good progressives are guilty of its perpetuation. We need to do everything we can to splash cold water on our collective faces and start breaking out of the grip of this downward spiral.

Second, we know the Democrats have increadible pressure from the commercial sector of society. We need to overcome that with pressure from the unwashed masses. The governing system is geared toward the interests of the plutocrats. I can say this having worked on the inside. Those on the inside absolutely need help from those on the outside. The Democratic leadership doesn't need a frigg'n honeymoon. Democratic politicians need the people to rise up and give them political cover. This will enable the politicians to take bold actions.

To that end, my recent essays have ended with contact links to Congress and the commercial mass media outlets. I'll continue that pattern here:

Congressional Contacts:

Write the US House of Representatives
Write the US Senate

Then, voice the same opinion to local and national media outlets.

Media Contacts:

Write the Major Media Outlets
.