« Movement, schmovement | Main | A tale of two lobbies, Part I »

Day-dream on

By Michael J. Smith on Friday June 23, 2006 08:52 AM

Bobw writes:
... Somewhere else on the blog, JS or MJS (one of the initial guys)caught my eye by saying we should insist that any democrat we might support sign a pledge of non-intervention. I quickly replied and called this a day-dream, since intervention is built into the imperial system, which is universal and bi-partisan.

Following on JR's placement of the discussion in the context of labor, why not, instead of asking our representatives to please sponsor a less violent foreign policy, demand that they launch programs to protect American jobs and develop new ones. For starters, reverse all the tax credits that encourage businesses to locate overseas, and provide credits for those that create jobs at home.

Has any democrat recently said anything like this? Not that I know of. Maybe we could trick John Edwards into moving in that direction!

Kevin Phillips observes that American politics oscillates between periods of go-for-broke individualism and free markets, and reactions against the excesses of untrammeled capitalism. Unfortunately, the former far outnumber the latter in our history, there being only two periods where free-wheeling business was reigned in, and social needs were met -- the New Deal, and the earlier so-called Progressive Era.

But maybe we are again at a point where the evils of free market capitalism are laid bare, and a movement can be built around jobs (and health) for the people, not profits for the rich. it would be fun to be part of such a movement, wouldnt it?

Comments (7)


Bobw sez:

... [to] insist that any democrat we might support sign a pledge of non-intervention [is] a day-dream, since intervention is built into the imperial system....
True enough. My goal in writing that clause into the pledge was ultimately to get people to understand just that. If you make up your mind that you're not going to vote for interventionists, then you soon realize that you can never -- well, hardly ever -- vote for a Democrat.


Further thoughts on making candidates talk about jobs first: it takes attention away from the bogus and distracting pseudo-concept of "national security". National security in fact never means anything except protection of some specific corporate interest, except now, when we have been brainwashed to believe that there is a worldwide terrorist plot to destroy us. What a joke!
Instead of national security, we should be concerned with national well-being -- and even that phrase is somewhat of a phantom. The only thing that's real is individual well-being. National well-being is the sum of all of those, but it is not a thing in itself. Any phrase with "national" in front of it should be treated with great skepticism. It is the language of Goebbels.

js paine:

i dare by
writing this
come off like
a prickly anal prig

but to me its not a case of either pushing
more jobs now
going on a anti gwotnik

we need two planks
one for each front

a total employment plank
which indeed has foreign policy implications not the least of which is exchange rate rectification

and a foreign bring home the kids
close the bases non intervention plank
which like wise has domestic implicationsfor our trans nat corporations


as to systemic challenges presented as
ie targeting
( in this instance )

nothing requires
the possible
and the plausible demand to be withheld
just because
as a practical
matter it stands
the same chance
of florishing
as a lake frog
dropped in the sahara

as mjs points out
its agit pro
it divides the knaves from the saints
and hopefully
it cuts out voting
a ton of
"not so evil as them"
orthrian scum that are in fact every bit as evil
or worse
once they cross
the american border

One of the fastest paths to full employment would be the ability to cut the work week while still keeping living wages as a plank. If each employed person works fewer hours, the number of job openings increases.

Of course, the last thing most purveyors of "democracy" really want is more citizens with the time to get involved in politics, even local politics. So I'm not waiting up...


as if to prove my point about who's the lesser evil
once we cross the american border

this vis a vis
north korea's
mystery missile :

"Two former officials of the Clinton Defense Department, including his Secretary of Defense William J. Perry, publicly urged that the Bush administration use a cruise missile launched from a submarine and carrying a high-explosive warhead to destroy the facility where the missile is supposedly housed. According to Mr. Perry and his cohort, Ashton Carter--a former assistant defense secretary under Clinton...."
blah blah blah


lovely eh ???

js paine:

anon x writes:

"Any phrase with "national" in front of it should be treated with great skepticism. It is the language of Goebbels."

apropos this ringing phrase

a JG note circa 1926

"our party task ....
nationalize the german working class "


I again take on JS. Sure, both planks should be part of "the platform", but not just for the purpose of separating the "saints from the knaves". We dont want to just stand on the sidelines and sneer, do we?
We want ringing slogans that appeal to workers' interests, cut through the crap of patriotism and false consciousness, and actually build a movement. Dont we?

Post a comment

Note also that comments with three or more links may be held for "moderation" -- a strange term to apply to the ghost in this blog's machine. Seems to be a hard-coded limitation of the blog software, unfortunately.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on Friday June 23, 2006 08:52 AM.

The previous post in this blog was Movement, schmovement.

The next post in this blog is A tale of two lobbies, Part I.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License

This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31