Church Privilege

12932992_1157503464260074_7425861875011916650_n

The world is a strange place full of so many strange and varied people. And yet, some people just didn’t get the memo: love won and continues to win in the face of charlatans and demagogues like Donald Trump.

The image above, shared on John Barrowman’s Facebook fan page, makes a great point about perspective. There are still people in this country, (pick one), that seem to think that minority groups are taking advantage of the public at large, even deceiving them, to place themselves in superior standing.

Um… no. That’s not what’s happening at all, guys. More like this: everyone is working toward being equal to the people who have been at the highest social point for many thousands of years. It’s not strange anymore: we’re all the same in that regard.

It’s not about privilege for groups who have been disenfranchised, it’s about equality.

Except for churches. They still take up 2×2 squares of space and don’t pay taxes even though they attempt to affect policy; you yellow bastards.

church

-M

Advertisements
Church Privilege

Last Word Before Iowa

9screen-shot-2015-04-13-at-8-07-56-pm-284x160

Today is Iowa caucus day, something we’ll be covering at DSW in between our regularly scheduled content both today and in future analysis as the primaries move forward. But before the caucuses wrap up I wanted to take a minute to say a personal word on the Democratic primary:

The first state hasn’t even voted yet, and I’m sick of this nonsensical power struggle already. It makes no sense, it’s dragging the party back into the ideologically split hell it needs to stay out of to remain viable, it’s trapped in the same crisis-minded thinking that the tea party has used as a thinly veiled justification to hold the country hostage for years, and much of it is built on a lie.

The lie is something that consistent conservatives and consistent liberals/progressives seem to agree on: America doesn’t simply have challenges it needs to face, it’s in decline. We are falling apart as a superpower, splitting open at the seams, etc. etc. Despite plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise, despite what has been called our greatest rival suffering through an economic slowdown, despite Russia, considered our main geopolitical rival, suffering a major economic crisis because of its incredibly stupid foreign policy decisions, despite double-digit unemployment still popular throughout Europe years after the Great Recession, despite a civil war in Syria producing refugees whose possessions are literally being stolen from them by countries like Denmark (which is often a country held up as a paradise the US should be aspiring to), despite all that, it’s us. America is a doomed, poisoned wasteland and we’re all going to die as slaves forced to work on oil rigs as the smog-choked air blots out the future sun.

This slightly pessimistic outlook has dominated the presidential primaries for both parties, primaries that started way too early. The campaign slogans say it all. Trump’s “Make America Great Again”. Sanders campaign rhetoric about restoring the American dream, a phrase that almost every single candidate has used at least once in recent years. Scapegoating of Muslims, millionaires, blacks, whites, and every other demographic group in the country during increasingly heated campaign speeches that are described by supporters of the candidates as “populist.” The groups being targeted might be different, the rhetoric might resonate with a different group of Americans, but the Democratic primary this cycle is threatening to turn into a mirror image of the bitter shit show going on in the other party.

And the reason is pretty Machiavellian, too. The amount of mud that’s been thrown by both front-runners at each other doesn’t normally happen unless there’s something deeper going on than the candidates. And there is: the introduction of raw and undirected populism into early 21st century American politics.

150907_r26949webillu-1200-620-28192038

At least, it was raw and undirected for a little bit. But for most of the last few years, it’s been completely astroturfed. There’s actually a documentary called (Astro) Turf Wars that details how the Tea Party was started and then co-opted a few years ago by the fossil fuel industry and GOP mega-donors. Democrats seem to think they’re immune to that sort of thing; their form of populism is righteous and pure.

Not so fast, actually. There might be lest astroturfing (so far) in the left-leaning populism that threatens to split the Democratic party at a moment where it definitely cannot afford it, but there’s still plenty of fear and misinformation upon which certain presidential candidates are more than happy to capitalize. After all, an accurate reflection of both Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders produce a huge amount of cognitive dissonance: how can two candidates who voted with each other in the Senate 93 percent of the time and whose views on issues only get more similar as the primary goes on be leading a campaign as filled with paranoia and background noise as it has been so far? Mistakes, real or misplaced accusations of sexismendorsements showering down and even changing from people who would never normally endorse, hit pieces and nonexistent scandals, millions of people are caught up in the idea that this primary is very important and that the two frontrunners are radically different from one another.

But here’s the thing: that’s simply not true. The combination of a false perception of why Barack Obama won the nomination in 2008 with encyclopedias worth of populist propaganda and fearmongering has led millions of people to believe America is facing a massive crisis and on the verge of revolution when in reality only the Democatic party is facing massive crisis. The problem, of course, is if the Democrats don’t get their shit together this country actually will be plunged a few circles deeper into hell then Bush managed to get it just eight years ago when a Republican president and Republican Congress start rewriting the tax code, building a border wall, registering and tracking Muslims, opening temples to Reagan, and whatever else they have planned. In order to keep this from happening, on the eve of hearing results from the Iowa caucuses, we all have to calm down, take a deep breath, and critically examine both what’s happening and how to fix it.

The examination starts with OFA in 2008. Now known as Organizing for Action, OFA started as Obama for America, an arm of the 2008 campaign which did most of its field and political work somewhat independent of the DNC’s own work on the presidential campaign. This was an organization born from the mind of a community organizer turned presidential candidate and it’s not an understatement to say it completely revolutionized the way politics is done in this country. It brought community organizing into the mainstream and after the election thousands of organizations and campaigns took lessons from that success, many even hiring staffers trained in OFA techniques.

ofa

The thing is OFA was and is about a new (old if you know your history) way of organizing while Barack Obama’s historic presidency and indeed the man himself have been about a new way of thinking about politics. Despite the media and his supporters turning him into something of a celerity in 2008, Obama was different in that he sincerely didn’t want his time in office to be about him as a political personality. People adored the man, but he was prescient enough to understand that wasn’t always a good thing and had no problem telling the American people the truth, whether or not they actually wanted to hear the truth.

There is little evidence Clinton or Sanders on the Democratic side and Trump or Cruz or Rubio (just to name a few) on the Republican side have the interest or ability in doing the same. That’s why I cringe when I hear people on both sides describe this campaign as a movement, because the candidates in this campaign seem more interested in saying what people want to hear then what needs to be said. People who willingly subscribe themselves to part of a movement built around a single political identity (in other words a candidate), or at least the people who have done so this cycle, are all clearly influenced by the crash and burn worldview described above and are all more than ready to “take the country back”.

Here are a couple of great examples of just how people with this mentality think and how they’re engaging on the ground in Iowa as we speak. Their movement, because it is centered around the candidate, quickly becomes an all-or-nothing mentality about the candidate themselves and whether the public should nominate them. A pro-Trump blog tells supporters, “Let others know, especially the press, there’s only 1 CHOICE you’ll accept.” (For the record I’m completely mystified as to why choice is capitalized). A similar guide on Reddit was set up for Bernie Sanders with even more revealing advice like “KNOW at least some of BERNIE’S positions!” (again with the random caps).

In other words, the “movement” is about the candidate, not actually the issues. The candidate sells the crisis, points out a few important facts almost as a way to deflect from the fact that those are only facts being mentioned in their stump speech, and gets mad. 21st century movement politics suffers from an overload of emotion and a severe shortage of actual policy.

And that’s not an accidental occurrence, which brings me to what I consider to be the greatest and most sinister lie of the political age, a lie which is currently dominating the Democratic primary and the election in general. I mentioned astro-turfing in this article because the phenomenon happening now is very similar. Particular in the Democratic primary, candidate centered movements are being sold as something that happens organically. Hordes of people are just mad as hell and aren’t going to take it anymore.

Except that they’re already being co-opted (on the Democratic side at least and I’m sure on the other side as well) to fight a battle that is anything but revolutionary: the tired and age-old fight between the center-left and the far left. Same old battle, just being played out with new boots on the ground. The talking points barely even change. And what’s amazing about ideological fights when they happen are the results they can produce. Think about this for a second: we are going into Iowa with two large movements, one in each political party, for revolutionary change. And if those movements are successful we will walk into the general election immediately following the administration of the first African-American president with two old white guys from the northeast still fighting the election of 1968 as our candidates.

More on this after the results.

iowa-caucus1-570x380

 

Last Word Before Iowa

State of the race in Iowa for parties

iowa-caucus-game

I figure I owe that portion of DSW’s readership which is passionate about politics a “state of the race” post since we’re only a few days out from the Iowa caucuses. Before I dive into where the candidates stand for each party, let me be clear on one thing: Early primaries, especially the ones in Iowa and New Hampshire, are completely pointless. They in fact undermine the whole point of the primary system, which is to nominate a candidate for president that is representative of their political party as a whole. It’s hard to argue that states like Iowa and New Hampshire are representative of reality in the rest of the country, for a number of reasons.

But that’s for another post, most likely immediately following the results on February 1st. For now here’s where both parties are:

On polling, the Real Clear Politics spread tells very different stories depending on which party’s primary we’re talking about. While one poll (Quinnipiac) only has him squeaking ahead in Iowa, every poll on the Republican side for almost every contest shows Donald Trump in the lead, one national poll by as many as 22 points. It’s also notable that in every one of those polls Ted Cruz takes second place and Marco Rubio takes third in the vast majority. Depending on the polls one takes a look at, it’s arguable that the contest in Iowa specifically has narrowed in the past six weeks, though far from certain.

The same spread shows a much closer contest for the Democrats. The FOX News poll pus Clinton ahead by 6, ARG puts Sanders ahead by 3. National polls show Clinton with a ten to fifteen point lead, and a comfortable lead in other primary states like South Carolina (CBS News puts her up by 22) and Minnesota, where she’s up by 34. But Sanders is dominating New Hampshire, CBS News saying he’s up by 19 there, while the Suffolk University poll has him up 9 points.

While a lot of analysis has focused on how high-stakes the Iowa caucuses are for both parties, the truth is more complex than that. The Republican challenge in Iowa is far different than the Democratic challenge.

Republicans have to decide how they want to identify themselves, and whether that particular conflict is going to be settled in a state like Iowa. Nate Silver argues that Donald Trump hasn’t been stopped by the GOP perhaps because not all of them are actually trying to win the presidential election this time around because there’s no “professional incentive” to. I think the issue is a bit simpler than that. The Republican party has for decades carefully crafted the image of the conservative commander in chief, one that acts with strength, behaves like a toned down alpha male with a folksy appeal and a blue collar aura about them, but one that is still intelligent enough on policy matters to handle themselves adeptly on the world stage and propose the occasional sweeping reform of a long-standing domestic program. They had rebuilt this image from its previous low point at the end of the Nixon administration so successfully that Bill Clinton had to all but copy it in order to get to the White House in 1992. But in 2008 they had the commander in chief image stolen from them by Barack Obama, who in addition to checking off many of the boxes the GOP thought only their candidates could, did so while maintaining an identity as a black progressive politician with a background working in marginalized communities. I cannot state enough how much Obama was able to capture that commander in chief image and completely shatter the idea it belonged more naturally with the GOP (the Palin factor helped quite a bit as well). Ever since then, without the commander in chief image to hold it together, the Republican party has returned once again to swaying back and forth between conservative extremes like a drunken Barry Goldwater stumbling in the night.

Democrats have a different question, though there are a few similarities which I hope to touch on in a different post. Having won this image battle they have almost taken the spoils from their victory too far. The Democratic primary is dominated even more than the GOP contest by a cult of personality. The two leading candidates voted the same way in the Senate (during the years they were both Senators, that is) 93 percent of the time, and yet the primary contest between them couldn’t be more divisive. The ironic part about this is that the contest centers on key personality questions (who’s most trustworthy, who has the temperament to be commander in chief, etc) but the only way to see which candidate is best in that category is to see which candidate makes the most sincere call for a return to a sane level of discourse between the campaigns and actually gets their supporters to follow them (that second part is by far the more important).

It’s possible that Iowa will end up being a more decisive contest for the Democrats than for the Republicans, but the potential is there in both parties for open and contested primaries.

-G

Image credit to The Atlantic

State of the race in Iowa for parties

Fascists and Robocalls Unite?

robocall-cartoon

 

In a sign that American politics has hit peak Family Matterswhite nationalists are now sending out robocalls for Donald Trump’s campaign in Iowa. This is yet another one of those strange and increasingly moments in the politics of 2016 where I just wrote a sentence I never thought I would write in my entire life. You can listen to the robocall here. It’s only 30 seconds long, but if you can’t bare to deal with listening to white supremacist nonsense for even that long, the call ends by saying “we need smart,  well-educated white people who will assimilate to our culture. Vote trump.”

James Taylor, the voice on the robocall, is from a group called American Renaissance, which I admit has a Norsefire-esque ring to it.He calls himself a one-issue voter, that one issue being immigration and backs Trump because, according to the Washington Post article featuring the robocall (linked above):

“He’s attractive to many Americans who see their country slipping through their fingers. You don’t want to end your days living in an outpost of Haiti or Guatemala do you?”

Donald Trump doesn’t actually endorse white nationalist groups, to be clear, and his campaign has actually fired a couple of staffers for allegedly posting over-the-top racist material on social media. But white nationalists certainly support him. KKK “grand wizard” David Duke has endorsed Trump, his only criticism of the candidate being that Trump’s support for Israel is a bit over-the-top. And groups like American Renaissance are actively campaigning for the man in Iowa. Not by knocking on doors or anything like that. No, that wouldn’t be annoying enough apparently. Apparently spewing hate across the state of Iowa like a ruptured sewage line does across a busy street isn’t enough. The hate must be recorded and delivered in the most annoying way ever contrived by the human race: the robocall.

The robocall. Perhaps that is in fact the most fitting way to deliver information like this, in a format that will sit on someone’s answering machine for a week. “This is Randy from Chase Visa about your account,” “This is an advertisement about how much credit we have to offer you for no risk ever*”, “We need smart,  well-educated white people who will assimilate to our culture.”  Maybe the only fitting fate for a message like that is it gets laid to rest with other such needless bullshit.

Anyone’s bet on whether this helps The Donald’s campaign.

-G

robocall_snl

 

 

Fascists and Robocalls Unite?

The Future – Our Future

I normally don’t have much love for New York (save some of the people that live there), but this week, two major New York papers have made huge statements about gun control. When the opposition has no better ideas (or no ideas at all besides Mr. Trump insisting that Muslims be banned from entering America; which is a bad idea all around), maybe it’s time to change the status quo.

The world is changing, our laws and our society must change with it; we can no longer be held back by the rule of the past and the aging generations. Look to them for wisdom and hard-earned sense, sure, but don’t let people with no stake in the future make decisions for the future.

The future belongs to the young – for better or worse. We’re going to be here, and we deserve the chance to shuck off old ways of thinking and look toward tomorrow.

Until next time,

-M

The Future – Our Future

On Paris: What We Don’t Know

french-flag-2-jpg

 

There’s a lot we still don’t know about the attacks in Paris that left 130 dead. There’s a lot we don’t know about the future after these attacks, or what’s going to happen in France or around the world as a result of ISIS demonstrating it can attack western targets once in a while if it chooses to do so (though now that even may not be true).

In this brave new media world where instant response and analysis is required in the face of events that used to shock the world into silence, many people have instead declared as loudly as possible what they do know. In many cases what they know are that according to them, Muslims are scary. That and clinical insanity can be the only reason behind Donald Trump wanting to tag every Muslim in the United States so he can then herd them and treat them as animals if elected president. In a less Hitlery but no less cowardly display, the GOP House, joined by almost fifty Democrats, passed a bill effectively banning helpless refugees (because apparently they’re also scary) from entry into the US. They even went so far as to surround and intimidate one of their own caucus members in a likely futile attempt to get a veto-proof majority.

But the fact is there’s still a lot that we don’t know. French authorities are still capturing some of the attackers; borders were closed due to the attacks until Thursday and may be closed longer. The French Senate is so unsure of what might happen next it extended the country’s state of emergency for three months. There’s no particular guarantee that will help anything.

The fact is it has only been a week since these attacks. Emotions are still raw, information is incredibly limited, and analyses are deeply flawed.

The fact is that by spreading fear and panic the media around the world is doing a gross disservice to humanity.

Analysis is one thing, and as we get it we will do our best to report it here on DSW. But for the rest of it, the fear mongering and the direct selling of emotional terror to the general public for political gain and holistic alternatives to Viagra for white male politicians in the US, enough. Shut up already.

-G

On Paris: What We Don’t Know