I have a few curmudgeonly musings on the pitiful sight of so many smart people being struck down by Capitulation Fever, the sight of Markos, Joan Walsh, Chris Bowers, Josh Marshall and others giving an enthusiastic thumbs up to a profoundly conservative, corporatist healthcare plan for America.
Maybe it was clear all along Rahm would be vindicated. Many people who call themselves progressive are not committed to a truly liberal vision of government. Those steeped in the political philosophy of the left, like Noam Chomsky, know that the essence of modern conservatism is "the transfer of public funds to private power," and what could better describe the current healthcare reform legislation, than a massive transfer of wealth from the public into private hands?
Liberalism, on the other hand, has a vision of a country in which people care about each other, and who know that no chain is stronger than the weakest link. They know that a country should be judged by how it provides for the less fortunate, and how every citizen should have the opportunity to live a full, healthy and productive life. They believe in government of, by and for the people. Being a liberal means going against the tide, being adamant, being determined and willing to endure sacrifice to struggle for worthwhile goals.
To liberals, the proper role of government to be on the side of the people, not the corporations who squeeze the lifeblood out of the poor and working class in order to make a few cents’ profit.We have to be grounded securely in our beliefs, so we are able to stand up to unfettered capitalism and the greed it spawns.
If the health insurance corporations and pharmaceutical companies try to extort money from the public, we should not roll over for them.
Here’s Howard Zinn, the old leftie, speaking about how we need to approach the struggle for a truly democratic healthcare system:
"I wish President Obama would listen carefully to Martin Luther King. I’m sure he pays verbal homage, as everyone does, to Martin Luther King, but he ought to think before he sends missiles over Pakistan, before he agrees to this bloated military budget, before he sends troops to Afghanistan, before he opposes the single-payer system, which you talked about earlier in your program. He ought to ask, ‘What would Martin Luther King do? And what would Martin Luther King say?’ And if he only listened to King, he would be a very different president than he’s turning out to be so far. I think we ought to hold Obama to his promise to be different and bold and to make change. So far, he hasn’t come through on that promise…
"…these people that I saw on your program earlier who were demonstrating for the single-payer health system, which Obama is very, very reluctant to endorse, they were doing what needs to be done. They were committing acts of civil disobedience. They were going into offices where they were told to leave, and they wouldn’t leave. They were doing what we were doing during the movement against the war in Vietnam. They were doing what the black movement was doing in the South. And this is what we will need. We will need demonstrative acts which dramatize the fact that our government is not responding to what the people need and what the people want."
Wow, demonstrating, civil disobedience, sacrifice. Strange words from a by-gone era perhaps. But I would like to see more of us care enough about the kind of country we want to live in, to step away from our computers, out of our comfort zone, into the streets and into the corridors of power. What else is there left to do at this point?



27 Comments




I think Obama considers Dr. King a quaint man. Obama even admitted during the campaign that King would not have supported him. Zinn and other Lefties made a mistake in assuming that Obama is one of them. He sees Lefties as a cartoon and not something to be taken seriously.
Good diary and I was thinking along the same lines about Gene McCarthy. Clean Gene had the guts and determination to challenge LBJ over the Vietnam War. And he won, or at least his side did, with the “realist” LBJ having to pack it in.
Today, we have no Clean Genes. Kucinich flip-flopped after a ride on Air Force One. Howard Dean is MIA. Russ Feingold both voted against a bill supported by Bernie Sanders to give social security recipients one-time help of $250 AND failed to block a voice vote with no debate on the Patriot Act Extension. Bernie Sanders sold out to the White House long ago on health insurance reform (but at least got a provision with billions going to health clinics).
America has been exposed. Jefferson was right: a people get the representation they deserve.
Never trust anyone under 70!
Nice post Carolyn . . thanks.
I think we’ll see people in the streets for peaceful civil disodedience but not until the system really collapses, and it’s close to doing so on all counts . . . the corporate oligarchy that ignores the needs of the masses will collapse unto itself, history has proven that.
Again, thanks for the read, I enjoyed it.
You know what, jimbowski?
Martin Luther King would be flipping over and over in his grave if he knew what Obama was doing with the Presidency, and so would Paul Robeson (anybody remember him–the famous singer?), for that matter.
The day after this bill passes, if it passes, every liberal and progressive group should come together and demand that before the November elections the Democratic-controlled congress must pass Alan Grayson’s HR 4789 bill allowing anyone to buy into Medicare. This is the only solution to this bad piece of legislation.
Thank you for such a thoughtful and sane reminder….we need your voice. And Zinn’s words.
It required 12 tweets, but I just tweeted the entire passage above where Zinn expresses his desire that Obama would really listen to Martin Luther King, and where he describes what he and we should all expect from him, too.
Zinn was not sold on Obama at all
I appreciate the comments supporting my diary. Thanks, guys.
At the risk of sounding like a religious fundamentalist, the left has strayed far, far from its roots in its quest for power. Now that the faux progressive Obama is in the White House he is defining for the public what liberalism is supposed to look like.
But it’s a sham. This is not liberalism; not even close.
Think about the Somali pirates’ gig. There is now a profitable business, replete with professional negotiators, hijacking ships and holding the crew for ransom. They succeed because the companies being extorted play the game and cough up the money, understandably, to be sure, but with predictable results. Pirating becomes a viable business money and folks continue to be kidnapped, and held for ransom.
Well, the corporations in this country are the Somali pirates. In the case of health insurance “reform” they have taken American lives hostage and have threatened to kill them (denying care) unless they get their pound of flesh, huge chunks of taxpayer money.
And progressives are allowing themselves to be extorted, because they feel it’s the only way to save the victims. But it isn’t, that’s the sad part. If enough of us followed Zinn, we would make a huge stink, the companies would cry uncle, release the victims and skulk away, like the odious rodents they are.
But instead they are getting away with it, and now they have a winning strategy for the next battle: financial reform, economic stimulus, attempts to combat global warming — you name it. We have no power, zilch, nada. Rahm was right and now everybody knows it.
And why are we at this sorry pass? Because so-called progressives have freaked, wet their pants and handed over the cash. And now these “liberals” are attacking others who see through the extortion plot and want administer justice to the criminals and free the hostages.
And it didn’t have to be this way. Zinn was right. We’re in this for the long haul, and it’s time to act, not wring our hands in defeat.
Great idea to tweet Zinn’s words. I wish he were still with us. We need his wisdom.
I remember seeing Zinn on Real News advocating that everybody vote for Obama.
There was a growing strong young people, international worker, and poor people’s anti corporatist movement going on before 9/11. It showed its power in Seattle and then grew each year. But 9/11 happened and “patriotism” meant buying corporate shit instead of railing against it.
Naomi Klein chronicles this is “No Logo” written in 1999 and then in her book “Fences and Windows” which talks about the new activism of 2000 to 2001. It is not Obama or anybody in the Democratic Party that should be looked to as our leaders. It is more like people like Raj Patel who has taken on the giants of agribusiness who deserve our attention and help.
Pick up her books. She is one of the heirs to Zinn in her chronicling of what the regular people are up to.
Here’s Zinn, The Nation, on Obama’s first year in office:
As far as disappointments, I wasn’t terribly disappointed because I didn’t expect that much. … On healthcare, for example, he starts out with a compromise, and when you start out with a compromise, you end with a compromise of a compromise, which is where we are now.
“I thought that in the area of constitutional rights he would be better than he has been. That’s the greatest disappointment, because Obama went to Harvard Law School and is presumably dedicated to constitutional rights. But he becomes president, and he’s not making any significant step away from Bush policies. Sure, he keeps talking about closing Guantánamo, but he still treats the prisoners there as ‘suspected terrorists.’ They have not been tried and have not been found guilty. So when Obama proposes taking people out of Guantánamo and putting them into other prisons, he’s not advancing the cause of constitutional rights very far. And then he’s gone into court arguing for preventive detention, and he’s continued the policy of sending suspects to countries where they very well may be tortured.
“I think people are dazzled by Obama’s rhetoric, and that people ought to begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre president–which means, in our time, a dangerous president–unless there is some national movement to push him in a better direction.“
“I was thinking along the same lines about Gene McCarthy. Clean Gene had the guts and determination to challenge LBJ over the Vietnam War. And he won, or at least his side did, with the “realist” LBJ having to pack it in.”
Me too! I campaigned for McCarthy and it was one of the highlights of my college years. (Yes, I’m THAT old!) I remember weekends traveling from campus in a crowded bus with other students, to canvas door-to-door in the Wisconsin primary. I remember sleeping on the floor of a college cafeteria, and then going out early the next morning to ring doorbells. What a great opportunity to play a part in grassroots politics.
I remember it as if it were yesterday. The bus we were on stopped at a rest stop on the way back to Indiana, and we heard the news that Johnson had just announced his decision not to seek reelection. There was pandemonium. We were on top of the world.
McCarthy’s wins in New Hampshire and Wisconsin caused Bobby Kennedy to enter the race as an anti-war candidate, and I believe he would have become President if he had not been killed.
I came to believe that anything is possible if enough concerned citizens work together for peace and justice. I still do.
You may be right: “I think we’ll see people in the streets for peaceful civil disodedience but not until the system really collapses,” and as you say that event may be closer than we think.
But why must it come to that? Aren’t we the leaders we have been waiting for? What’s keeping us from taking to the streets and the halls of Congress and demanding change?
(There are anti-war demonstrations this weekend. See Rossl’s diary for details.)
Far out. Peace, man.
Just can’t trust those young’uns. They’re corporate stooges. :)
Here’s Zinn again, on Obama, in October 2009:
“Those surprised or disappointed are those who ‘exaggerated expectations, romanticized him, idealized him. Obama is a Democratic Party politician. I know that sounds demeaning. It is.’”
“’There’s an enormous weight left over by the Bush administration,’ Zinn said. ‘Unfortunately, he has done nothing to begin to lift that weight.’ Change can happen only by grassroots protest strong enough to move entrenched interests.
“’I’ll say it: turmoil,’” he concluded.”
Here’s Zinn calling on people to vote for Obama and denouncing third parties.
A lot of people supported Obama. I did until the FISA reversal proved to me he was a sell-out. A lot of us wanted to support an African-American for President, especially those of us who lived through the civil rights struggle.
I think people of integrity couldn’t quite grasp how unprincipled Obama was, how he could passionately and eloquently defend points of view he casually abandoned whenever it was expedient.
So Zinn wasn’t omniscient. Neither was I. As soon as Obama began showing his true colors Zinn unendorsed him publicly.
Here’s Zinn in a letter to Nader, reversing his endorsement of Obama, saying he was voting for Nader:
Dear Ralph:
I was wrong in saying I would vote for Obama. I was not thinking of the slam-dunk states, of which Massachusetts is one, and I will vote for you in Massachusetts.
I still think that the electoral arena is one that saps our energy, and gets us nowhere. What you say about civic activity not having a chance to change policy is pessimistic and wrong, and if civic activity cannot be effective then electoral activity will be even less effective.
Civic activity is the only way things can change — you should know that better than anyone because you’ve been so good at it. Such activity affects public opinion which in the long run, when it becomes widespread enough, forces changes in policy. Electoral activity, in a managed political system when the candidacy of third party candidates can only show weakness, will not change public opinion. We are not in a Debs-era situation, when a powerful Socialist movement represented millions of people.
In solidarity,
Howard
Well done, Carolyn.
Wow, I didn’t see that letter to Nader. Thanks!
No problem.
Obama has openly admitted his political philosophy was shaped more by Ronald Reagan then Dr. King. We just didn’t take him seriously. Oh well.
I agree, we need more of Zinn’s words. Over the last few weeks I’ve posted excerpts from a 1994 Zinn lecture at http://katiealvord.blogspot.com – Zinn’s thoughts on objectivity, on Native American history, and on the real reasons for wars. Next one will be on optimism, as Zinn expressed it: “Surprises take place in history and we’re surprised only because we’ve not had the faith that the common sense of people and the good instincts of people and the small acts of people will at certain points come together and have an effect.” At some point this could even happen for health care.
Thanks for inspiring me to do it with this post!
Thanks for the kind words, RevBev. Your support, and that of others here, means a lot.