Hip Forums Buy Posters Here!   Click to Chat

Active Journals
Hip Shops
Latest Videos
Hip Search

New Reply
New Journal Entry | View entries you: Submitted or Replied To | View All Entries | Subscribe to Journal
Old 11-06-2009, 01:22 AM   7: Cynicism and American Politics
135547
political squaw
Member
 
Replies: 2
Views: 270
7: Cynicism and American Politics

I decided to re-post this one to see what people think
---------------------------------------------------

Cynicism and American Politics

When Bill Maher, the comedian turned political commmentator, was recently asked on CNN if he thought Sarah Palin has a future as a presidential candidate he opined, “I don’t know about a presidential candidate, but I would never put anything past this stupid country.” When angry callers asked Maher to clarify what he meant by his statement they were met with the curt response: “I don’t need to clarify, it is!”

Sadly Maher’s sentiment finds echoes among many who identify themselves as “liberal” and “progressive.” Paradoxically it is a view that is utterly reactionary, unscientific, and elitist to its core. After all, like everyone else in the mainstream media, Bill is no Marxist. As he once put it, “Of course Capitalism is good, I am not a Communist.”
Cynicism is a very useful tool for those in power. Although it inherently expresses a sense of dissatisfaction, it offers nothing as a way out. The charade of the two-party system has done a lot of damage to American workers’ perception of politics in general, and created a situation where cynicism and apparent apathy is widespread. Just listen to a little bit of the late, great, George Carlin and you’ll see just how deep-rooted it has become.
The two-corporate-party setup in the US tends to churn up a lot of political confusion. The lack of a fundamental difference between the two parties reduces much of the political discussion to extremely petty issues.
Gore Vidal expressed this quite well when he said: “We only have one political party in the US, and that is the property party, which essentially is corporate America, which has two right wings, one called Republican and one called Democrat. I can’t say I like either of them.” We couldn’t have said it better - no wonder most American workers are alienated from politics!
When the elections roll around, the decision as to which politician to support often boils down to their personality traits rather than their platform. Incredibly, polls show that Americans have consistently elected the presidential candidates that they would rather have a beer with since Reagan. In the case of Sarah Palin this is all too true. Being the first woman and “regular hockey mom” to come so close to the Presidency, she is of serious symbolic importance to many women, who rightly are disgusted by the glass ceiling for women under this system.
The same is true of Barack Obama. What he symbolizes for millions of poor and working class Americans, and especially minorities, is extraordinary and cannot be underestimated. If the mainstream narrative is to be believed, his Presidency ushers in a “post-racial” era in US politics. But has there really been any fundamental stray from the policies of Bush? The fact is, despite the color of Obama’s skin, he and the Democratic Party represent the very same people behind the Bush presidency.
One major reason for the current apathy is that millions of people feel that they have nothing to vote “for.” After all, as Michael Moore once put it, the lesser evil is still evil! Many people have given up on simply voting “against” the “other” party.
What is needed in the US is a party that represents working people. Such a party could be the political expression of the labor movement to combat the attacks of both the Republicans and Democrats. Such a party would go far in combatting the cynical and apathetic attitudes of many toward politics, as there would finally be a force led by workers in the interests of workers, particularly the most exploited sections of society, minorities, immigrants and women.
What excuse would anyone have to be apathetic or cynical if such a party existed? Of course, many mass labor parties around the world have had time to develop a strong bureaucratic crust on top, which acts against the interests of the workers they are supposed to represent, but their power is increasingly being challenged by the rank and file. An American mass party of Labor would be forged in flames that most careerists and bureaucrats are terrified of, the flames of struggle!
A Labor Party would drastically change the dynamics of American politics. American workers would quickly reclaim the militant traditions of labor battles that once shook the country. This may seem like ancient history to some, especially those like Bill Maher, but history has a funny tendency of repeating itself on an even higher level than before.
Folks like Bill Maher, while being astute commentarists on the absurdities of the system, have no faith in or even the remotest conception of the potential power of the working class to change society. Once American workers have a mass political party of their own, Maher and co. will have to find other things to joke about.


Written by Mark Rahman

 

Email This Journal To Someone Subscribe to Journal Entry
New Reply
11-06-2009, 07:27 AM Old
 
66995
 Nyxx Nyxx is offline
This is an OUTRAGE!!!
I agree with many points in this article. A workers party would be great, and I discuss this quite often when politics comes up. I have noticed that pople that call themselves "liberal" or "progressive" are more open to the idea of a workers party. Most conservatives I speak to about this are reactionary and think I am a pinko or a socialist (god forbid you have anything negative to say about capatilism).
The USA seems more like a corporation than a country nowadays. Look a the heath care debate! Why do we not have health care for all of our citizens?
As far as Sarah Palin goes...I would not vote for her because she seems like a religious extremist, that is just one of the reasons. I am a female, and would not vote for someone just because I could relate on a personal level. Thanks for posting this, good article.
11-06-2009, 04:11 PM Old
 
135547
political squaw political squaw is online now
Member
Nyxx,

I think it is absolutely awesome that you agree.

To tell you the truth I haven't expected any answer at all, as I haven't expected anyone to relate.

Concerning the labor party, it is real. All one needs is followers to start. I am sure a lot of working class people would support the idea. Then register it with the secretary of state. In order to do it one will have to send a letter :
"- Names and addresses of temporary party officials
- Name of the party.
- Constitution or Bylaws. Your party's ideology shouldn't be contra to the laws of the state (or the country), which basically means it doesn't promote illegal practices or the overthrow of the regime. Please note, that if your party is after changing laws in the country/state (for example, many small new parties are supporting legalisation of illegal drugs), it doesn't mean you're "supporting illegal practices". In fact, you're trying to change the laws in a democratic process, and in theory not support any violation of the
law."

Next promote the party, to have certain number of supporters to participate in the elections. One won't have to start an expensive campaign, as it is a workers party. All one and the party supporters have to do is spend enough time visiting factories, working class neighborhoods in order to talk to the people, explain to them that this party is going to represent their interests directly. Meaning that the party officials will just voice the workers opinions, which workers can share on the party gatherings. This is a very simple way to start changing things. And it is perfectly legal, not like you have to kill anyone or steal anything. The Law still allows it. So, I'd say- hurry.

And it should be nothing but Labor/Workers Party. Not like Communist/capitalist/socialist/democrat etc as those are theories, and as society changes, those theories become worthless. Party should represent people's interest, not a social theory. so if Working class needs Capitalism, the party would promote capitalism, if it needs communism then communism, according to the social conditions.

----

an example of a bad party name choice (I giggled)

http://www.fencing.net/forums/thread39066.html

so the name is "Labor/Workers Party" and constitution or bylaws would be just this line "representing the working class interests".

Bookmarks

Posting Rules
You may not post new articles
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:10 AM.

The Hip Forums are intended for mature audiences for entertainment and educational purposes only. Hip Inc. doesn't encourage anyone to break laws, so know the law where you live. You are solely responsible for your actions on this site and illegal activities will be not be tolerated here.

Portal By vbPortal Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, vbPortal. All Rights Reserved.
Click to buy cannabis seeds at auction!