Frankly My Dear, We Are All Losers In This Apocalypse

One of an historian's greatest contributions to society has to be the ability to see the big picture. We start with oftentimes unrelated primary source documents and weave them into connecting prose. Like beads strung onto a string, these primary documents become more than the sum of their parts in historical analysis, revealing clues about the past to make a significant (sometimes even beautiful) picture about where we are. With enough empirical data, an historian can generalize about his or her subject. For instance, that food was a much higher proportion of a family's budget than rent in 1900 compared to 2000. The researcher, and/or others, makes use of the new data extrapolated from the primary sources to make further generalizations. If this process is repeated enough a narrative emerges, describing the world in a particular time and place. During election season it is very easy to get lost in individual races, issues, and events. To get at the big picture of American politics and society it is necessary to seek out narratives that ask the right questions. This essay compares two articles by authors asking those questions.

Thomas Frank is an historian whose works dig deep into the underbelly of American political life often agreeing with John Winger that we are mutants whose ancestors were kicked out of every civilized country on Earth, who thrive on getting over on each other at every social class level. If anyone can give a good narrative on the big picture it is Dr. Frank. His latest article in Salon, We are such losers is something of a reaction and tie-in to Rick Perlstein's latest big picture work The Invisible Bridge, which will have to wait for it's own review from this blog. Frank uses the tool of historical comparison to make his larger point, that liberals fall in love with leaders who claim to be "post-partisan" and project their own values onto that leader. So the American left is continuously let down when those leaders turn out to not share their values. We are losers because we keep hoisting bland, well-meaning conservatives like Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama into "great man" status and feel betrayed when they do not magically transform into liberal lions once in office. But liberals have always fallen in line behind standard bearers who not strong liberals, from Adlai Stevenson's day right down to presumably Hillary Clinton.

If one tried then to read patterns from Schlesinger's classic The Cycles of American History onto the Carter years to today, you find almost a complete reversal. Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. argued with strong evidence a strong tendency of American politics to rotate from periods of reform to periods of conservatism where the public and institutions swallow the changes and the reformers are spent. While not usually thought of as a reformer, Richard Nixon did in fact bring about some sweeping changes. Notably the Environmental Protection Act that established the EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Act were major domestic reforms that Nixon deserves at least some credit for enacting. But as Frank points out, Carter brought religion into the White House in a way it had not existed before, along with an almost authoritarian leadership style that saw social problems as simply a complex equation that when solved was also resolved. Popular belief is that deregulation began under Reagan but it was Carter that took the crucial first steps.

Since then, the cycles have been between periods of reactionary attacks on social programs and regressive tax cuts by Republicans, and efforts to close deficits and slow the cuts by Democrats. This reversal makes the supposed conservatives into reformers, much to the detriment of most Americans. And the supposed liberals into conservatives, putting much energy into simply preserving the New Deal. So what Frank points out in his article is that progressives are playing a losing game by backing "antipoliticians" like Carter and Obama. So if the only choices are conservatives and radical authoritarian reactionaries, what are actual liberals supposed to do?

Despair.

That is basically what Don Hazen, editor of AlterNet.org, argues in his look at the big picture.

Apocalypse Now: Seriously, It's Time for a Major Rethink About Liberal and Progressive Politics.

We are losing badly to the corporate state. Here's what we need to do.

Every day, [the entire range of horrendous and growing problems we face as a society and a planet] passes by before my eyes. At AlterNet, there are no issue silos—there is just the open faucet of depressing political information coming and going every hour of every day (with the occasional story of success and inspiration). 

That is pretty gloomy, even to a GH. Hazen skewers much of the supposed liberal's conventional wisdom, that "if people just knew the truth they would vote for real change," and the insanity of continuing to do the same thing when it so rarely works. Elite, highly educated people control much of the apparatus of liberalism and progressivism in this country; people who do not feel the pain Republican budget cuts cause. Hazen does not state it openly, but this apparatus for reform has itself become conservative, with little imagination or new ideas.

 

So, the political system is blocked by out-of-touch conservatives while being wrecked by the opposition reactionaries, even reaching the political system is impossible due to the lobbyists guarding the gates. No money, no access. Meanwhile, the money that does come in for reform efforts is hopelessly diluted between single issue groups. Even the Democratic party is divided into so many parts, each chasing the same small pool of donations and often working at cross-purposes. Hazen also points out that many progressive thinkers believe in technology as a panacea, citing:

[M]y old friend Jerry Mander, formerly a guru at the Public Media Center in San Francisco. Mander is perhaps best known for his somewhat culty, much-loved 1978 anti-technology critique, 4 Arguments For the Elimination of Television. He made the case that problems with television are fundamental to the medium and the technology, and consequently cannot be reformed.

 Facebook and Google are not alternatives to the old-fashioned grind of organizing. Hazen reports that most progressives get their news from these giants, that we are at their mercy. I stand guilty of this as well, it is sad to say but talking to real people, in person, is very hard. But organizing is the only way out, making connections one-on-one, and building a real network instead of a virtual one. As I just said, I am as guilty as worst offender out there. I wish I possessed the social skills and courage to be an organizer. Those people exist right? They cannot all have been co-opted by the corporate world, using their skills simply to con people and make money. There have to be some Norma Raes out there somewhere.

Is the big picture this bad? Can small victories or success in your personal life make these generalizations less meaningful? After all, these articles present the opinion of just two people, albeit smart and wise ones. How do reading these articles make you feel? Resentful? Angry? Inspired to prove them wrong? Or should you just brush the idea that there is anything wrong with the world off and go about your daily life without giving any more thought to the big picture?

It is, after all, up to you.

There Are No Ebola Zombies

Is the fact that people must actually state in plain language that Ebola will not and has not led to an epidemic of the undead shambling about a case of wishful thinking or plain stupidity? Look, we all love The Walking Dead but isn't the whole zombie fad starting to lose a little steam? Or is there truth when AlterNet asked, Are We That Gullible? No one really knows how far Ebola will get in the US or the extent of mutation in the virus, but it is just the slightest bit unlikely that casualties will be reanimated.

Before the current pop culture fascination with the living dead I had an idea to write a thriller about the zombie apocalypse occurring in the midst of complete governmental and societal dysfunction. But I never thought it would actually happen. Now we get to see how our eviscerated government, useless for-profit media, and large minority of completely insane and rabid 'wingers react to an outbreak of this dangerous disease. As much as I would like to believe Shepard Smith that we have absolutely nothing to fear, the truth is that the danger is not zero. Nor is it so great as to warrant the hysteria you see on the news.

Shep Smith is the guy Fox News turns to when they cross the line. When the blow-dried troglodytes and leggy blond idiots take some issue too far, Smith comes on with a reassuring break in the insanity to provide the propaganda network some CYA insurance. Freedom of speech and of the press is a great thing, but even in our system it has limits. The noise machine has lately been shouting "Fire!" in the crowded theater of America's living rooms on Ebola, feeding nicely into the extreme right's conspiracy-fueled madness.

It would be great if this Ebola Zombie business was a way to punk cable news, and provide that left hook of incredulity to shock the dumb from our collective consciousness. But according to Weathers the public has been just eating it up, even if the stories are coming from parody and satire sites. Max Brooks took on this topic in World War Z where a character laments the conflicting commentary and misinformation from media during the denial and great panic stages of the zombie war. "So much spin, so few facts" or words to that effect.

I guess it is too much to wish for that the professional journalists of our time rise above the level of a comment section troll or people would not fall for something as stupid as Ebola creating zombies.

Gas Price Conspiracy

The comment section strikes again! I posted a link on my Facebook page yesterday from The News Hour on PBS discussing the recent decline in gas prices. The actual discussion was not very informative due to the short length of exchange between the host and an energy and commodities reporter with Bloomberg News. It is a fact worth reporting that the gouging has decreased by 40 cents, equating to "a $500 or $600 tax cut for every household." That being the profit tax of the oil industry levied after 9/11 and just ignored by politicians ever since. The participants breeze over a few contributing factors without much detail. Perhaps this is why the commenters took the initiative to offer some fun and fanciful explanations of their own imaginations.

I have always found the correlation between the noticeable drop in gas prices the proximity to elections rather fascinating. Whether by accident or design the phenomenon defuses the profit tax and associated problems with energy as campaign issues. But my imagination has always been rather limited. So let's have a look at some of the more exciting/ominous reasons for relief at the pump.

This all about Russia - Putin needs to go, so there is a deal between Obama and OPEC. Low as we can go - let them bankrupt Putin's Russia.

MAYBE ONE REASON IS THAT SINCE THE ISIS TOOK OVER SOME OIL WELLS IN IRAQ THEY BEGAN TO SELL OIL AT A VERY MUCH LOWER PRICE THAT CONSUMERS RUSHED TO BUY FROM THEN SECRETLY....

Here's why in a nutshell.The Gulf monarchies are flooding the market to bring the price of oil down so "Fracking" isn't profitable.They want to put the American and Canadian companies out of business.Because a lot of debt is incurred while producing oil through fracking,and it's more expensive to refine oil in "tar sands",all the monarchies have to do is keep up the increased production until the "frackers" go bankrupt. With the "90 day corporate mentality" we have here in the States,it won't be long before the monarchies achieve their goal.When we stop our expensive oil production,they'll go back to their OPEC quotas and raise prices.They have enough reserves to put every "fracking" wildcatter out of business.

 Previous explanations of why the price of gasoline remained high even when crude oil prices fell, usually included the lack of capacity to refine more. Have we suddenly built more refineries? Not that I have heard about.
Over the past several election cycles, I have noticed a pattern between fuel prices and the party which holds the White House. As election time nears, if there is a Republican president, fuel prices increase before the election. The opposite holds true when there is a Democrat in the White House. the tie-in is usually not as strong for mid-term elections as during a presidential campaign.

 Four things control the price of every thing. Not in any order of significance. Supply, demand, delivery cost, politics. A week after the elections the price will go up to cover the loss, plus fifty percent. As with anything the more you sell, the item price goes down, so when electric cars are the standard transport and petrol based vehicles wane the price for petroleum will sky rocket. Democrats will have sold their soles to get this price drop just before a critical election looms. One payoff I bet on will be new pipelines from the fracking sites to the east and west coasts. Just watch the laws and regulations melt away. This is funnier than a dropped match in a fireworks factory.  

 Also, note that Middle East turmoil, such as is now occurring in Syria and Iraq, plus sanctions on Iran, would traditionally send the price of crude, and of gasoline up quite high, are having no effect now.
Argues strongly that politics has more to do with the price than market forces.

 the magic number they used to use was $65,was what they needed to make a profit
then they said $90,now they say $83
speculators have added $20 to the price
they told us that if we export American oil prices will drop,because speculators are awash with oil with no place to send it,look at the big wall st firms profits,a lot of that is from oil
even at this price your going to see more electric cars on the road,or hybred,
I also agree with the comment below its an election year,so they drop the price of oil until its over,
Saudi cant drop output as it has to keep the natives happy,so they don't overthrow the royal family,they need the money,

You get the idea. I did not copy links that some included but you can find them in the original. Isn't it awesome that PBS has so many budding geopolitical strategists they can tap?

As Powers Boothe said to Lea Thompson in Red Dawn, "you've just seen too many movies darling."

 

 

Michael Savage Must Be Stopped

Over a decade of endless warfare has left this country with many damaged souls. Now, one of the most vile screechers on talk radio has finally gone too far. Michael Savage, the devil of San Francisco, recently went on a tirade attacking veterans with PTSD as a "bunch of losers." Of all the venom-spewing psychos on the AM dial, Savage has always been the worst. Now, finally, this pantywaist chicken hawk who never wore a uniform or thought of anyone's wellbeing beyond his own narcissistic ass may get what he deserves.

After my own tour of duty I spent several years working in a factory. The local AM station replayed his awful show at midnight during my shift and I would tune in in an effort to stay awake while working. Between an incredible display of hatred for all things not Michael Savage, juvenile insults and name calling from a man who purportedly holds two Ph.Ds, and his yelling/spitting delivery I would get so angry that I was alert and awake beyond anything coffee could do for me. His racism, misogyny, and outright fascism has earned him a special place in hell. If he even has a soul. I always imagined that he would split down the middle during one of his rants about vermin (immigrants), demoncats (guess), filthy scum (anyone receiving public assistance), or other colorful metaphors about Muslims and a stream of cockroaches or maggots would pour out.

Again, for an individual with two Ph.Ds., there is remarkably little insight or intellectual creativity to his hate. I do not recall an original thought or line of reasoning from him, just vitriolic streams of invective for which ever Democrat happened to be in the news that day. Savage is the epitome of what the great conservative intellectual James Burnham described in Suicide of the West. Anti-liberal individuals will use the liberal society's freedom against it to destroy society and liberty. Burnham meant communist agents working for the Soviet bloc but his ideas apply to anyone opposed to liberal values like freedom of speech and for the press. At best, Savage is the equivalent of intellectual empty calories, more realistically his show is an incitement to violence.

With his attacks on veterans with PTSD he has entered dangerous territory. There is no telling how many lone wolf terrorists he has anonymously programmed to go forth and destroy. I for one will not grieve if one realizes he's been had and comes home for revenge.

Hopefully All Talk

Here it comes:

Milwaukee County’s Republican Elections Commissioner Rick Baas warned a crowd of volunteers and supporters Friday night to be “concerned about voter fraud,” and urged the hundreds of attendees to take an “extra step of vigilance.” “You as a Wisconsin resident can challenge people who are not supposed to be voting,” he said at the Milwaukee County Republicans event. “You’ve got to do that.” [emphasis mine]

 So the plan now is basically to encourage vigilantism?

Right of Way Outrage

I stumbled onto a story yesterday completely by accident, I am sure it is too little for MMFA or any other group on the lookout for proto-fascism in our midst. However, it is just one little tile in the mosaic of virulent nationalism and scapegoating that is essential if you want to plow under a rotting republic in favor of a dictatorship. Check out this headline:

Florida man ordered to remove American flag display draws huge support

 Contrast it with the original source:

Hundreds of flags line Cape Coral roads

Basically, the manager of a hardware store put up a bunch of little flags on the public right-of-way grass between the street and sidewalk, someone complained that it violated a city ordinance, and the city asked him to move them back onto private property... about 6 feet. This incident has 2 amazing similarities to 1984. First, that "hundreds" of people turned out to further violate the ordinance and put up a shitload more flags in exactly the way the telescreen announcer on Airstrip One constantly repeats how "workers spontaneously demonstrate to show their gratitude and joy." Second, is that the original story has disappeared down the memory hole. Originally, there was a segment from the Ministry of Truth (fox news) where they interviewed the guy involved and he admitted voluntarily removing the flags... until the patriotism police showed up and put up almost one hundred times more flags. Now, anything that might indicate that this incident began as a simple and easily resolved disagreement between an individual and the city is gone. In its place is a confrontation between unfeeling, unaccountable government mindlessly enforcing arbitrary rules and the patriotic masses standing up to the tyranny of right-of-way ordinances.

Wow, in Oceania it took dedicated effort by a huge bureaucracy to collect all copies of newspapers or other documents, destroy the item that the Party wished to change, and reissue them. Now with a few clicks the job can be done by one or two individuals in a few moments!

Orwell is rolling in his grave.

The Magical Ebola Mystery Tour

Yes really,

I had so hoped not to have to write about this. Yes all of you children on cable news, Ebola is scary but please get a grip. We have now experienced weeks of fear mongering by the usual suspects in media. Some just to sensationalize an exotic disease for ratings and therefore profits, but fox news has taken the opportunity to push their agenda of hate. To say nothing of the outright comic book villain level mischief attributed to our president and the government he heads by Alex Jones and the conspiracy nuts. I am interested in how the public is digesting the facts vs. misinformation and what the popular outlook is on this outbreak.

First off, I do not want to in any way downplay the seriousness of Ebola. This is not a "Don't Worry Be Happy" post, irresponsibility runs both ways. My heart goes out for anyone infected with this horrible disease. I would like to point out that the outbreak is very small and any commentary must keep this in mind. Also, how many potential epidemics have been hyped by the media in recent years? SARS, swine flu, and bird flu to name a few. I am old enough to remember the last time a new disease was taken seriously and not completely sensationalized, namely Lyme's disease. Though I do not know why that one was kept in perspective when we had just been through apocalyptic AIDS coverage. Mad Cow went the other way, real danger and potential safeguards ignored to protect the beef industry and heads-in-the-sand hamburger eaters. These outbreaks all have something in common though, we are all still here. To hear irresponsible media tell it though, we are one flight from Africa away from extinction.

And it is working. I have been monitoring chatter on the subject of Ebola (as much as one person can) in conversations both electronic and the real world. As far as I can tell, everyone has an opinion and they are all bad. First is the sentiment "I just don't trust the government to handle this." Well, this is just entry-level stuff but shows just how effective the republican party and right-wing noise machine has been in denigrating our democratic government. And the hypocrisy of these screeching, cage-crapping traitors is staggering as well. Was it not less than a decade ago that they were all about protecting the government and its republican office-holders from criticism during a national crisis? Anyway, yes, government's essential function of protecting the people is impaired when an insurgent force campaigns on, wins office on, and implements a platform of destroying government's ability to research and combat deadly diseases through privatization, budget cuts, staffing agencies with partisan hacks and incompetents, and demonizing science generally.

Beyond these real concerns though, is the outlook espoused by people who just don't trust the government to deal with the outbreak of Ebola in the US. They seem to be saying that they just cannot fathom anyone smarter then they are in a position to address the crisis. The doctors and nurses working at the CDC and NIH are not trained and experienced in health care, disease management, or disease prevention, they must be just like me. Not all staff members in this critical department are political appointees, and it just is not possible that cronies could completely take over. The hacks can do considerable damage and may make this crisis more serious than it may have been without the wrecking crew, but your average employee at the Centers for Disease Control is going to be more qualified than a bartender or roofer. There are still standards that must be met.

On the opposite side you have the double thinking conspiracy theorists. I do not have the stomach to look at any of those websites, but I get the drift just from statements like this:

Don't worry about the plague that's about to kill millions of Americans; FEMA has enough coffins and death camps for everyone. The rich will get the cure, of course. You did know there's a cure for ebola, right? Just not for us.

When one presents a fact-free assertion like this they must gloss over the concurrent belief that government is incompetent. But if I remember my Art Bell catechism correctly, conspiracy theorists accomplish this by separating the democratic, public, government with all of it's flaws and corruption from the shadow, private, government that carries out assassinations, overthrows other governments, and has "big plans" for all of us little people should we get out of line.

That last sentiment has really gotten out of hand. A deep-seated projection that pops up among conservatives every time a Democrat sits in the White House. "They are coming for our guns, they are coming for our women!" These are deeply authoritarian notions and we do not have time to annotate or even mention all of the self-pitying persecution fantasies spewed forth from the noise machine or its gullible followers except to say that this is what they would like to do to all the hated "others" that authoritarians feel both superior to and vindictive toward. Take this wonderfully eliminationist notion recently posted online:

If we just kill all with Ebola now it will save millions later....just sayin

The individual who posted this, and all the enthusiastic commentators supporting the idea forget one thing, who is going to do all of this killing exactly? The demon Obama and his "ordinary black panthers" or will we be privatizing murder? You can bet that every person concluding that killing the infected is a great way to go came away from every stupid history channel program on the Nazis feeling so superior to them and that they would never do anything like that...



I'm just going to drop these titles here for further consideration, they may be of some help.
And before you dismiss the last quote as just a silly notion from an average American guy with no support from the responsible governing class people, please have a glance at this story about the former GOP director of South Carolina who, in all seriousness, has a serious hankering for murdering Ebola patients.