Letters to the Editor
-
Where from?
FranCB wrote:
AM offended by the notion that just because I now support Barak Obama, I am a "blind" cultist. Where does that come from?
It emerged from analogies and comparisons made to the Jim Jones cult of the 70s. The fanatical dedication of followers to Jones, defending him against any and all criticisms (in the media) and their willingness to do anything for him. Oh yeah, and the glassy-eyed vacant look in their eyes when watching him, the head nodding and bobbing, the mantras etc.
Not that the "kool aid" was in the picture yet, or that Obie will make his followers take any! Just that the eerie echoes of the spell binding orator, and how he captivated and ultimately mesmerized followers is evocative of the Jones phenomenon.
Foot note: There are probably other mesmerizers that may be more apropos (and less offensive) to compare Obie to than Jones, but Jones is the archetype and the first that comes to mind.
-
Very thoughtful, intelligent article, not leaning for or against Obama or Clinton
I am going to start reading Salon more often. Frankly, I have not been very impressed with the level of political analysis most of our press has given us this year. The vast majority of it, in my opinion, has been both deeply partisan and very superfical. Most of what we see, quite frankly, is just cheer-leading for one side or the other.
This piece really stands out, because -- contrary to the hysterial letters above -- it is not an Obama bashing piece. It is neither for or against Obama or Clinton. Instead, it is a genuine effort to explain, in historically informed terms, the real issues brought to light by Obama's steeping in the cow paddy in San Fran.
I was particularly impressed by the depth of historical knowledge that Lind shows. It is not everybody who can see the continuity between John Adams and John Kerry, but Lind does, and I think he is right.
But, the reaction to this piece above shows why it is so hard to have any thoughtful discussion of politics in this country. The New England culture is so persuaded of its own vast superiority that any time you even try to discuss these issues, of course, the New England derived-liberals instantly just put you in the category of the great unwashed. Lind does not believe that what is wrong with Kansas is that it can not see that Harvard is right about everything, so, obviously, Lind is a boob, a bohunk, to be dismissed as yet another unenlightened one, who can not grasp the greatness of these fabulous people.
I am a Republican, so, candidly, I am very OK with whole situation of the Dems taking over the historical position of the Federalists and the Whigs. To me, it is obvious why the John Kerrys of the world can not win. How do you win an election by telling the majority that they, and their entire world, is worthless? Why would anyone vote for a snob, who looks down on them?
The issue with Obama was never race. All nonsense aside, Obama is basically an upper-middle class guy, raised by white folks in Kansas, who went to Harvard. He is not black, in any significant sense of the word. But, who cares? Nobody gives a damm what color his skin is. What people do care about is here is yet another latte liberal telling them why their state is a pig farm and they are dirt farmers. The voters are funny. They do not like their leader insulting them. But no New England style liberal will ever understand that.
-
from your boy drudge, gop, I mean clinton supporters
You gothca games, lies and discredit attempts failed. Back to the drawing board gop, I mean clinton supportrs. You can't win with facts and debating polices and stances. come up with a new gop talking point. no one's buying your last five. Why? Credibility. You lost it two years ago, gop. No one's buying yoru rush/hannity/o'reilly arguements.
Tell your freinds to get off the air, and their can then work to rebuild what you lost, gop. your accountability and credibility.
back to the drrawing board for the fascist propogandists. Try again cultists.
"GALLUP: OBAMA SCORES LARGEST LEAD OF YEAR...
LATIMES/BLOOMERG: Clinton losing traction in Pennsylvania, Indiana...
Reid: Dem nomination 'is all going to be over very soon'...
*Jokes Dem race making him 'bitter'... "
-
thanks for being honest
Thanks for echo what the other republcains, I mean clinton supporters, here are saying. Thanks for lumping them with you, sir.
On another note. Your thinking centuries in the past. Whatever the democrats argeuemtnts. WHEN clinton finally drop sout your party is not going to be thinking like the whigs. your going to follow them in irreleavnce.
Again, fox rush savage, coulter hannity and on and on, destroyed yoru party. Don't hate and blame obama. No credibility or accountability (due to being bush lawyers/appologists and propogandists who refuse to acknowledge reality), destroyed yoru party for a generation. Not obama. not those fighting to fix the damge you people have done. You are responsibile for your parties downfall.
Now please allow us to select the opposition (to your fascist party) representative, without your gop sabotage. you have your candidate. Stop sabotaging teh process and everything america was founded on, traiotrs.
-
Identity Politics Creates Liberal Snobs
The reason that I bash rednecks as a snobby rich straight white guy is that by doing so I make myself not the enemy. Unless I find somebody else to bash then I'm the white guy and I'm thus the enemy. My way of proving my legitimacy is to say that I'm not like "them." There's more pressure on me to establish my distance from "them" because I fail in every category of identity politics. I don't know what to do with that.
I'm not saying that non-white/non-male/non-straight/non-rich people are not oppressed and don't deserve some degree of deference and abdication on the part of the privileged like myself as a result. But if everything I hear from the movement I want to be a part of is that people who look like me suck, then I'm going to try to find a way to prove myself. For former fundamentalist Christians like myself, it's also a matter of proving that fundamentalism is wrong (i.e. I'm not going to burn in hell for rejecting my former identity because fundamentalists are racist war-mongers who like to dump oil in lakes for fun and torture baby seals).
In the world of the radical left, a black working-class lesbian has the same superiority in cultural capital that a rich white straight male has in the mainstream capitalist world. I don't know know the solution to the fact that I feel completely illegitimate because of my privilege; to some degree, I think that white guys like me should shut the fuck up and sit in the back of the bus, but as long as we understand that that's what we're expected to do we're going to say, "Oh, I'm not really white like THOSE PEOPLE from rural Pennsylvania are." Until we address the white guilt issues and power dynamic reversals within identity politics, white snobs will continue to use redneck-bashing as a way to feel OK about themselves.
I think there needs to be a categorical way to describe a form of "oppression" that impacts people who aren't oppressed by anything other than the guilt of knowing that we aren't oppressed. If we could call our lack of oppression "oppression" and somehow make someone else the enemy who "oppresses" us and engage in legitimate struggle against our "oppression," then we wouldn't need to find rednecks to bash in order to hide our own status as oppressors. Until we have some way of saying that we don't inherently suck because of being white/straight/male/rich or any combination of those categories, then we will continue to pretend that rednecks are the real oppressors so that we don't have to call ourselves that.