Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Start Making Sense: How To Talk To America

By Lakshmi Chaudhry and George Lakoff and Van Jones and Adam Werbach and Wes Boyd, AlterNet. Posted June 7, 2005.


Those who dwell in the nation's progressive oases must learn to communicate and connect with a much broader swath of Americans. Our panel of progressive thinkers tackles the problem.
Advertisement

Editor's Note: The following is Part II in a series of transcripts taken from a standing-room-only book panel in San Francisco for AlterNet's new book, Start Making Sense: Turning the Lessons of Election 2004 into Winning Progressive Politics. Already in its second printing, SMS brings together some of the best-known progressive thinkers and doers to map out a realistic plan for building a new movement for change in this country.

The panel included Van Jones (executive director of Ella Baker Center for Human Rights), George Lakoff (linguist and best-selling author), Wes Boyd (co-founder of MoveOn.org), Adam Werbach (executive director of Common Assets Defense Fund), Lakshmi Chaudhry (senior editor of AlterNet) and moderator Holly Minch (director of the Spin Project).

PART II

Holly Minch: Thank you very much for joining us to celebrate the release of the book this evening. And our hope with the panel is to really explore many of the same themes that emerged in the book. Sort of 'what happened, what do we do about it and what do we find when we look to the future?' So those will be some of the questions I will be posing to the panel....

... I would like to pick up this thread about not just being a thorn in the side of the establishment but becoming the establishment; becoming a force of people, a community that is able to speak to the middle, that is able to speak to a much broader swath of Americans than we have been able to do and I want to ask that question in the context of the culture of increasing polarization in this country.

You know, coming out of the election we had a sort of either/or dynamic set up in this country; red states, blue states; hawks/doves and never the two shall meet. So, how do we in that context of increasing political polarization and how do we in particular, those of us who dwell in the liberal oasis of the Bay Area, learn to break out of that and learn to communicate with and listen to and connect with Republicans from a place of deep respect? How do we learn to connect with the part of the country that we have not been connecting with to date? [Applause]

Van Jones: How many people in this room were born and raised in San Francisco? How many people were born and raised in California? So, I wasn't. And I want to say something about this. First of all I think that the left in our country, we almost have gone through a process where we got a divorce from our own country. For me I grew up in the middle of the country. I'm from Tennessee. I'm a Southerner; red state. I got my feelings hurt really bad growing up. I was not in the big clique. I was a nerd. I was sensitive and I left as soon as I could. And I fled like a lot of people in the left strong holds. I fled to the cosmopolitan coasts where I felt like I could belong. And I joined some of the subcultures on the cosmopolitan coasts that felt more welcoming to me. And I was able to find my place and find my voice in doing that.

But something atrophied in me that showed up around the Thanksgiving table. And I suddenly discovered that I could not talk or communicate or be heard by people I had literally grown up with. I went back to neighborhoods and churches that I literally had grown up in and when I would talk the room, it would freeze. People would squirm uncomfortably and when I finished five to ten minutes later some relative, out of pure kindness, sympathy and compassion would say, "Well now, that was a mouthful. Boy can you pass the ketchup?" And the conversation would move on.

We don't have to ask the question how do we learn to talk to America. We have to ask the question when did we make the choice to forget? What was the injury? What is the pain? How long are we going to let being-bullied-in-high-school run our lives and run our movement? [Applause] This is a question.

At some point we have to accept responsibility. We cannot lead a country we don't love. We cannot lead a country that we don't love. The country is waiting for a movement. The country is waiting for a pro-democracy movement. Not a left movement, not a right movement.

The country is waiting for a pro-democracy movement that can inspire it and not just critique it. And it's time for us to have some kind of a homecoming. We are not little people any more. We are strong. We are beautiful. We are healing. We did something in this country that has not been done for decades and we did it on a dime and the turn of a dime. We built a beautiful pro-democracy movement in our own country that came within a hundred thousand votes in Ohio of unseating one of the worst presidents or the worst leaders globally the world has ever known. We are a beautiful, powerful, proud movement. [Applause] That's who we are. And we can go home now. We can go back now and we can say, "Guess what? You think things are bad now? They are bad now. But these are actually the good-old days.


Digg!

For a complete audio recording of this panel, visit the SMS blog entry with MP3 files for downloading.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
curt1234
Posted by: iana_gheddis420 on Jun 7, 2005 4:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Living in America shouldn’t be so difficult. I wonder why these people hang around on evenings making life such an excruciating academic exercise. George Lakoff is not what the left needs. The left needs to consider its over reliance on government and try developing a rational platform. Liberal policies don’t work. And these liberal ‘know it alls’ don’t have the answers.
George Lakoff seems to believe that republican are the party where a dominant figure tells everyone what to do and underlings like being told what do. That is ridiculous. Community smoking bans, political correctness, taxes, lack of property rights are the left’s way of telling people what to do. I don’t fear Ashcroft as much as I do Ginsberg.
Take medical marijuana. The true conservative stance is that it should not be illegal to grow anything on your property. The liberals have created an anti private property stance that provides all the ammo in the drug war. Read Wickard v Filburn, a case the Supremes to to decide the recent dicision on legal medical marijuana. Their hands were tied by this case that had its roots in FDR’s New deal policy. Liberals have their hands in making marijuana illegal every step of the way, yet we blame Ashcroft? It is not rational. It’s the fault of liberals who push environmental, immigration, and anti property rights agenda, only with unintended consequences. Read justice Thomas’ Dessent on the ruling. He is angry that a government has the power to make growing a plant illegal. (http://wid.ap.org/docume (remove space) nts/scotus/050606raich.pdf, pg 59, and definitely page 61—READ IT!!)
You’ll read the responses to my entry—look for the illogic that flow flows from liberal talking points. Someone might even say Nixon started the drug war—and forget that he was the man who started the EPA.
I’m looking for a conservative solution to our ills. Someday, people won’t have to attend seminars such as the one the created this response, America should be a place where people live their lives unfettered by policies that tell people what to do or not do. I’d love to sit in my back yard a smoke a joint, but when I am frustrated that I can’t, at least I’m smart enough to direct my anger toward the nannies on the left!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: curt1234 Posted by: nanobubble
» RE: curt1234 Posted by: flame
Really Making Sense
Posted by: chitijdth on Jun 7, 2005 4:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Once again, this discussion is an example of how many, many progressives talk endlessly to themselves, making one another feel good, without addressing any of the key issues that might actually change things. There are really only a few central issues which are, presently, making it impossible for progressive candidates not only to succeed, but even to run. One is our election system; and the other is the corporate control of the media.

Ever since the Reagan era, with its weakening of regulations and laws which, at least, allowed for a glimmer of the democratic process, we have had no progressive candidates on a national scale – and few in state-wide elections. For example, New York, a traditionally progressive state, has as its Senators, Schumer and Clinton – Democrats, indeed, but not progressives by any stretch of the imagination. Until candidates can run without the financial backing of corporations, we will not have any progressives able to mount a campaign – and the Democrats in power are those who have already sold out to corporate money. When Howard Dean – while no progressive on certain issues, but certainly more in that direction than John Kerry – attempted to change the fundraising process and not utilize large contributors, he was savaged by the Democrats far more than the Republicans. It seemed as if most of the DNC and DLC, if given a choice, would have preferred to have Bush re-elected than have Dean be the Democratic candidate. With Bush in the White House, they can be the honorable opposition, accomplishing nothing that would offend their backers, but had Dean been elected, the Democrats would have had a President who was not beholden to those backers – a most dangerous situation.

Second, regardless of what language progressives use in communicating with the “other” is almost immaterial – it will get short shrift in the media. A perfect example can be found in Eric Alerman’s, “What Liberal Media?.” The chapter recounting Al Gore’s attempts to get his message through during the 2000 Presidential campaign reveals this perfectly – and Gore was not even a progressive. So, it seems to me that if progressives want to change things, they might stop chattering on about how to talk to others, but start taking action to change the ground rules that do not permit progressive positions to be taken and/or disseminated – regardless of how they are couched.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Really Making Sense Posted by: Deanna Zandt
» RE: eally Making Sense Posted by: chitijdth
» Try Making Sense Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: eally Making Sense Posted by: Lizka
» RE: eally Making Sense Posted by: talkbox70
» RE: eally Making Sense Posted by: aries72
Cheap Talk
Posted by: 42Years on Jun 7, 2005 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we go again. While the progressives talk about what needs to be done, the conservatives are just doing it. Only trouble is, what the conservatives are doing is bad for all of us. We know it. The White House and Congress know it. But who is doing anything to counter the Republican strangle-hold on America? Have all the meetings you want and discuss the topics to your hearts content. It takes up your time and makes you feel good. But remember, there are many of us out here who want more than cheap talk. We want leadership that will reverse the wrongs done by the Bush Gang. We want Americans to take back America from the rich and powerful corporate giants. We want short, to-the-point statements of what is wrong and how to fix it. For example, why should we nervously stand by as gas prices go up while the oil barons make billion dollar profits? Instead of placing blame, we should admit cheap oil has about come to an end, tighten our belts to pay more at the pump, and encourage conservation on a personal level. Except for work, I'm willing to use my car every other day or third day. Heck, I'm even willing to carpool once or twice a week. It is only a matter of exchanging one habit for another. Eventually, we will reach a new comfort level and accept the change. There are many ways to reduce our dependence on oil and gas. Use less lighting in the house at night; turn up the AC or down the heat; don't water the lawn; don't wash the car; make one organized weekly trip to shop instead of daily trips; read a book instead of watching TV. You get the picture. It really does start at home. Until we are willing to change our individual lives mankind will continue to march off the cliff and enjoy the fall. And the meetings will go on trying to figure out what motivates us to jump.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Cheap Talk Posted by: Deanna Zandt
» RE: Cheap Talk Posted by: kittynboi
How about working to get your base to vote?
Posted by: scc on Jun 7, 2005 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems to me nobody is talking about getting your base to vote. Republicans worked very hard to get theirs out to vote. That was their strategy. They did not try to resonate with inner Schwarzenegger in undecided voters, they just made sure enough of their people voted. Democrats seemed to understand that in the last stages of the election campaign but now they are back solving the "how to win the voters in the middle". American elections have typically low voter turnout so there is a lot of work to be done. While working on this you do not have to dillute your message by trying to win some elusive middle-of-the-road voter.

And while analyzing why Dems do not vote you may discover interesting things. For example you may discover that it is far more beneficial to win back African Americans who probably feel right now they are not represented by anyone instead of trying to win NRA members by being ambiguous about your position on guns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

baloney
Posted by: profmarcus on Jun 7, 2005 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"learning how to talk to" a broader swath of america is a bogus exercise... we liberals and progressives talk just fine already... i spend a fair amount of time talking with folks who support bush, with folks who support fundamentalist christian values, and with folks who support conservative government policies and i have no difficulty whatsoever being understood... (please note: i deliberately used "talk 'with'" and not "talk 'to'...") what i have found time and time and time again is that the vast majority of these folks don't WANT to be "talked with" and they DEFINITELY don't want to be "talked TO..." for whatever reasons - political conviction, religious faith, bigotry, bias, preconceived notions - they have imbibed the "kool-aid" and nothing, and i mean NOTHING, is going to change their minds... sitting around, wasting our time talking to each other about how to talk to THEM, is an empty exercise and besides, it positively stinks of elitism...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: baloney Posted by: Deanna Zandt
» RE: baloney Posted by: kittynboi
I Stopped Reading After the First Few Paragraphs
Posted by: thirdmg on Jun 7, 2005 7:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here we go again. Another of the mea culpa articles in which we blame ourselves for not reaching out and listening to the right-wing lunatic fringe which molds the thinking of the rest of the country. Don't think of conversion strategies to move the country to our beliefs and values. Rather, think of concession strategies to move ourselves to where the country already is, while abandoning our convictions, our positions and our embarassing constituencies. And, of course, when we get there, the right will have moved the country even further in its direction. What a pitiful way to fight in the political, economic, social and cultural war the right has declared against us! No wonder so many, including conservatives, say that the Democratic Party is hopeless because it refuses to take a stand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I really think it's a question of being credible.
Posted by: Hawksana on Jun 7, 2005 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The folks in Kansas who don't find liberal political activism credible are not crazy. They've grasped something fundamental about the nature of the system that for me took seeing The Corporation and Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media.

Given the way corporate interests affect everything that happens in our world, any politician that believes that he has the power to buck the system and really implement the kind of change we need is either totally naive, or is lying.

Dean was honest. He told us that we had the power, and he's right. With the best intentions in the world it's impossible in the current political system for any politician to effectively bring about the changes we want to see to any significant degree.

Without a change in the political wind, the best we can hope for is that we've got a a set of politicians that can keep their fingers in the holes in the dike long enough for the political wind to change and the storm that is threatening to unleash itself on us to be blown out to sea where it belongs.

Our best resource is one another -- rich and poor, educated and uneducated, articulate and inarticulate, of all races and nationalities, religion and non-religion, sexual orientation and gender identity. To get this right -- the passage from one form of civilization to another without first descending into depths of unknowable darkness -- is going to take all of us.

We need a social movement of the order of the one that pushed the British out of India, and led to the political will to pass and enforce the Civil Rights act and the Voting Rights act. Both Gandhi and King were elites, but they cast their lot and lived their lives as one of the people. And for that we need a vision that will cast out fear.

Based on what I'm seeing, and hearing --both in person and on the internet, I think the movement is happening -- its still in seedtime, but it's happening. And it needs everyone without distinction.

-- That's what I saw happening at the National Conference for Media Reform in St. Louis last month. It's what I expect to see at DemocracyFest 2005 this month. And I see it all around me here in Indianapolis. It's still small, but seeds are small. Remember the parable of the mustard seed?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's Do This
Posted by: mviscid on Jun 7, 2005 8:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think talks like this are worthwhile, as they help forge a solid theoretical base. We progressives are obviously having trouble with that. We need Lakoff and everyone else to contribute their expertise and experience to counter the traditionalists' mantra of fear and absolutism.

It's not just political tactics, its ideology. We need another model. We need to make this black or white, Dem or Repub system obsolete. 'Cause it ain't working! And it's not just Lefties who think so. Discussions like this only help. That is, so long as action is taken as a result. And that's where You and I come in. We can do this. Reach out with your feelings!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh please.
Posted by: kittynboi on Jun 7, 2005 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is all this talk about how these people, the fundamentalist religious red state nascar dads, are intelligent and reasonable. but if these people really do, as often claimed, think its important that someone drink lattes or eat sushi, then how could any sane person consider them reasonable? A person who thinks these personal tastes is of some paramount importance is not a reasonable individual, and when something like this absurd enters in to the political discourse as a serious issue; whether or not the liberals are effette latte sipping elitist frenchies, it is not an indication of a healthy political culture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh please. Posted by: jingoist
» RE: Oh please. Posted by: kittynboi
yes, doing, not talking
Posted by: uchu on Jun 7, 2005 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The idea of figuring out how to talk to America is a wasteful political excercise. The whole thing that is wrong with American democracy is that politicians are just talkers, always sculpting their message to embrace as many people as possible.

However, when it comes to actually taking action, those same "talkers" walk the same line that all republicrats/democricans...which is the rich get richer, business interest trumps people/states rights, and most of our money goes to military offense.

as a real life example. Deval Patrick, a supposed "progressive" democractic candidate for Massachusetts governor is a pro-business candidate. one of his central points is about "selling massachusetts" to outside businesses...something he borrowed from Republican Gov. Romney. Deval is great at talking progressive, but his previous actions and inability to commit to NOT supporting water privatization are clear signs of his reality as a republicrat talker!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: yes, doing, not talking Posted by: nanobubble
We must not ignore this
Posted by: cfk on Jun 7, 2005 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please read this site: we dare not ignore this!!!!

http://www.yuricareport.com/
Dominionism/
TheDespoilingOfAmerica.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's our vision?
Posted by: themikeaustin on Jun 7, 2005 9:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I browse - and read - several progressive web sites and blogs nearly every day. The vast majority of this content is "fault-finding" in nature. That is, it describes and analyzes what's wrong with the status quo.

Unfortunately, what progressives actually stand for is seldom discussed. It must be inferred from what we are against. This is no way to bring people around to our viewpoint. Because, as long as we are not able to succinctly communicate our values and our agenda, our opponents can infer what we stand for in a way that suits their purposes.

All progressive web sites should strive towards a goal of having a minimum of 33% of the content of our web sites devoted to communicating our vision and our agenda.

For instance, the Apollo Alliance should be given regular opportunities to explain how its program would increase our energy independence, create living wage jobs in America, lower our trade deficit, etc. This replaces "whining" with a plan and communicates to readers that we have actually thought about where we want our country to go. Similarly, we need to have articles detailing what a progressive tax system ought to look like. There are plenty of people out there thinking and writing about these issues. Their voices should be added to the mix.

We will never convince people that our vision is aligned with their values if those people only know what we are against and not what we are for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's our vision? Posted by: nanobubble
You clearly do not know what political liberal means.
Posted by: dalter on Jun 7, 2005 9:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No explicit premise structure = no morals, just expediency. That is your problem. No wonder 'you wonder' at the democrats trying to appease our facist conservative 'republican' political right in this country. You do not express any clearly stated political principles because you have none.

Real political liberals and progressives act to protect the stated liberal principles in the constitution that state our inalienable 'political and individual rights of us as individuals and as a people. Name a democrat in congress that is vociferously and constantly trying to do that against the entrenched power of corporations and the special interests who own them.

Ans. You can't, and clearly none of you do either.

Blah, blah, blah. Not one of you offered a definition of Political Liberal. Lets try the "Concise Oxford English Dictionary". The definition is only seven (7) words long: "for democracy and the abolition of privelege.". Not a hard to defend is it, if you really are 'for democracy', and not just for privileges for yourselves.

We could start with "corporate privilege and power", corporations clearly are privileged over people, yet they are legally just a piece of paper that explicitly denys them privileged status over people. A small privileged group of rich investers controls them. Yet 'progressives' let corporations act in clear violation of their legal charters. No wonder we real liberals do not trust you so called 'progressives', whatever that term is supposed to mean.

Conclusion: Progressive you are not because you are clearly not 'Political Liberals' as our founding fathers were. You people are Blah, blah blahers.

Try believing in a principle and acting on it.

Dan Alter

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressives for Pro-Life
Posted by: auromar1 on Jun 7, 2005 10:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want to thank Lakshmi Chaudhry's comments about a segment of progressives in the Democratic Party's valid problem with the DNC's pro-abortion stand. How can a party supports non-capital punishment, and at the same time supports abortion right. It is too convoluted for me. Life is life whether it is articulate or not, whether born or unborn. DNC and its leadership has to directly address the issue. No amount of semantic can convert it into a non-issue - cannot ride astride two opposing issues.

Sincerely,

Marcelo Napuli

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Progressives for Pro-Life Posted by: dlroetzel
» RE: Progressives for Pro-Life Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Progressives for Pro-Life Posted by: dlroetzel
» RE: Progressives for Pro-Life Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Progressives for Pro-Life Posted by: dlroetzel
Spinning wheels
Posted by: observer on Jun 7, 2005 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reason that progressives/liberals cannot get through to the conservatives, or to the "heartland" of america, is simple - AUTHORITARIANISM. Authoritarianism is the reason that republicans are unified, and democrats are not. Authoritarianism is the reason that so many "religious" people are republicans - because the authoritarian structures are the same. It all goes hand-in-hand. DONT QUESTION AUTHORITY BECAUSE AUTHORITY WILL PROTECT YOU, whether authority is god or the potus.

So, for some reasons (911 being the biggest one), half of this country feels like it needs to be protected, and they are looking to who is going to protect them, and they will do whatever they are told to do if those instructions come with the promise of "protection."

So instead of asking how we talk to america, we need to be asking how to stamp out the authoritarianism that has turned half of the country into submissive drones. It seems that encouraging and even demanding critical thinking throughout the education years is the only way to change it. And do we really think that is going to happen? Remember, too much education/critical thinking makes you a liberal, and liberals are the enemy. Simply learning how to talk to people who only want to be "protected" from what is different from them (whether it's gays, muslims, atheists, commies, etc) or their ideals is not going to solve our problems and make people wake up from their self-induced authoritarian stupor. As someone upthread pointed out, these people DON'T WANT to be talked to, or talked WITH. They don't want to think differently. They don't want to know any other way. Maybe we CAN'T change that, perhaps it's karma at work. After all, you can't dish out death and destruction for centuries and expect to be rewarded for it. Maybe it's just that we are living through the end of the empire, and authoritarianism is the vehicle that is driving us to that end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Spinning wheels Posted by: spyderbaby
DRoetzel
Posted by: dlroetzel on Jun 7, 2005 12:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The time has come to ask ourselves if trying to change the behavior of the media broadcast giants can be beneficial to us. If they (CBS, NBC, ABC -yes I know they are owned by conglomerates) cannot be counted upon to uphold the common good should they be allowed to use (own) the common asset of the airwaves they use ? May we make better use of these resources, the airwaves, as a source of revenue to pay off the national debt and to bring broadband access to the public ? This would put America into a better position economically for all, Red and Blue states, not just a Media Elite that has done nothing now for almost two decades in defending democracy from
lies and hypocrisy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: DRoetzel Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: DRoetzel Posted by: dlroetzel
» RE: DRoetzel Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: DRoetzel Posted by: dlroetzel
tremphunter
Posted by: tremphunter on Jun 7, 2005 12:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to be honest here. Basically half the country doesn't vote. pepole are more concerned with the winner of American idol than they are with politics. Those of us who take the time to actually read the news are a rare breed. I worked my ass off last fall canvassing and making phone calls. So many people I talked to just don't care. John Kenneth Galbraith summed it up well. In general we live in a "culture of contentment". People have their TV's, big SUV's and the like. I work in a High School in a wealthy small town with a lot of well educated teachers. The discussion in the faculty lounge during lunch is sports or TV. One other teacher and I talk politics regularly and we are usually greeted by polite, quizzical looks. I suspect that not much will change in this country until the republicans really overreach, or we have a draft, or a crisis like the great depression. I suspect that with the end of cheap oil, the whole edifice we have created may come tumbling down. That being said, it is not my inclination to give up. The thing that I do constantly is to confront the ignorance as well as directly confront our local Republican establishment. We also need to confront the fact that religion is a huge part of the problem. It is probabaly not a coincidence that the most religious of the industrialized countries is also the most conservative. (Check out "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris) After all those that that can get you to believe absurdities can get you to commit atrocities. We simply must commit to continuing the battle and never giving up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: tremphunter Posted by: center_peace
» RE: tremphunter Posted by: Lizka
» RE: tremphunter Posted by: spyderbaby
SORRY BUT
Posted by: Mewsician on Jun 7, 2005 3:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the overwhelming reason people like me/us are on the outs is not because of some perceived weakness by the Democratic party, but because this country is full of idiots. I'm with Observer, above - the hard truth is that a nation gets the leadership it wants and it deserves. A democracy requires an informed electorate, and while I'm as mad as the next guy about the sorry state of affairs with the media, the truth is that the people in this country allow and embrace this state of affairs! You can't blame Bill O'Reilly because so many millions of Americans are too intellectually lazy and dishonest to do the work it takes to get their minds around the imperatives of basic constitutional concepts like separation of church/state, an unfettered, independent press, etc. How is it the fault of the Democratic party that so few people take the time and trouble to really know something - anything at all - about the truth of what George Bush is doing to this nation? About his economic policies and their disastrous effects? About the dangers of nascent fascism? I mean, it's not like history isn't replete with examples of exactly what's going on right now. Fox News sells because it's telling people what they want to hear and what makes them feel good, because it's easy and black-and-white and they can agree with it without doing any real work, rather than because it's based on any empirically based data; how sad is it that so many people not only don't fight this terrible crippling insurgency but are in fact happy to let it be?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: SORRY BUT Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: SORRY BUT Posted by: Lizka
SORRY BUT...PART II
Posted by: Mewsician on Jun 7, 2005 3:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't read discourse like that in the article above because it's all a load of breast-beating crap. I fight the red-staters one at a time, fact by fact, and FORCE people to come face-to-face with their own utter culpability. If somebody tells me "I love our president!" then I immediately demand that they tell me JUST ONE thing about ANY economic policy of Bush's that they are personally benefitting from, or indeed one small detail about anything at all emanating from current White House policy. Inevitably, they can't. When they can't do that or don't even know who Karl Rove is or are completely unable to defend anything armed with hard data, then I tell them they haven't got the right to be a voting American if they don't know any more about things than they evidently do. And whether they like it or not, whether they would ever in a million years admit it out loud, they nevertheless leave the conversation forced to reckon at some tiny, inner level with their own willful ignorance. I'm not making any friends that way, I realize, but who cares - the difference between red and blue staters is that you're on one side or the other: either you believe "we're all in this together so let's figure out a way" or you believe "I've got mine so screw you." Who needs friends of the latter persuasion anyway? And the only reason I bother engaging with these uninformed, willfully blind people is that now - as never before - they're taking the rest of us down with them. I say the Dems should launch a campaign in which every bus has a billboard on its side and every TV commercial is focused on one idea: "Real patriots KNOW THE FACTS before choosing sides. And HERE ARE THE FACTS about Bush policies. Not dogma, JUST FACTS. Do the responsible, patriotic thing, and learn about them. Are the Bush policies the kind of things you want to support? If not, then get with the program and VOTE DEMOCRATIC." (At least until a viable third-party alternative comes along.....)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: SORRY BUT...PART II Posted by: center_peace
» RE: SORRY BUT...PART II Posted by: Mewsician
» RE: SORRY BUT...PART II Posted by: Lizka
» RE: SORRY BUT...PART II Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: SORRY BUT...PART II Posted by: Lizka
Common sense
Posted by: thweems on Jun 7, 2005 4:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of our "progressive" and "liberal" values are just plain common sense. So why should progressives have so much difficult communicating their beliefs to middle America? Obviously, we have to figure this out. I think the first thing we need to do is ditch these worthless binary labels of "liberal/conservative", "left/right", "Democrat/Republican", and so forth. These are nothing but weapons of obfuscation for the right-wingers to play word-games with. If they toss the word "liberal" at something it's like a hand-grenade - everybody ducks for cover. Just take the discussion down to the level of common sense. That's what people want to hear. I'ts not about political parties or "us" vs "them". The idea that everyone has a right to a living wage is not rocket science. People can understand this if we just put it in plain language.

And yes, it is absolutely critical that we learn how to respect people who have differing views. I'm not talking about the fruitcakes like Tom DeLay or Bill O'Reilly. I'm talking about ordinary Americans who are getting the sand thrown in their eyes by the right-wing propaganda machine. You'll never get them to understand your point of view if you don't show some respect for theirs. The political discourse in this country needs to be framed more in terms of a dialectic rather than a battle where one side wins and the other loses.

As for all of these posters blustering about how the average American is too stupid to care - just grow the fuck up, man. If you have that much contempt for your fellow human being then why do *you* even care? If you want to masturbate yourself with that kind of self-righteousness, that's fine - but your crappy attitude isn't going to accomplish *dick* in the real world. Either be a part of the solution, or go sip your latte and shut up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Common sense Posted by: spyderbaby
» RE: Common sense Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Common sense Posted by: Lizka
» RE: Common sense Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Common sense Posted by: Lizka
JINGOIST
Posted by: jingoist on Jun 7, 2005 5:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Only a leftist would ask a question as stupid as "how do we talk to people in a more politically effective fashion." Start by telling the truth on occasion!! The dem. party has been hijacked by a bunch of nuts! I'd give you a list, but there's only so much room on this website. For now this looney leftist talk loses elections for you guys, which is good. In the future America is going to need a mentally healthy democrat party to present the other side. Kindest Regards, JINGOIST

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: Lizka
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: thirdmg
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: Lizka
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: JINGOIST - Logic Problem Posted by: thirdmg
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: Lizka
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: thirdmg
RE: JINGOIST
Posted by: maxpayne on Jun 7, 2005 6:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep trying, rightwinger. We know you are desperate to keep the rightwing panderers of the Democratic Party in power so that you can enjoy watching Bush and GOP continue their theocratic fascism but we're not giving up even if it takes some elections !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: JINGOIST Posted by: jingoist
Why not try something really radical - like socialism??
Posted by: Lizka on Jun 7, 2005 6:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Try this site: www.wsws.org! Worth it for the news alone. Good one to add to your bookmark list.

Only problem with them, if you happen to be religiously inclined, is that they discourage religion and encourage atheism. I'm waiting for their party to clarify their position on this, anyway.

However, there most definitely ARE Christian socialists!!

It seems to me, that in a very technologically advanced society, which is what America is increasingly becoming - you might as well have some concept of shared property, no, and sharing all the benefits of civilization? Can you all not see, that an advanced society reaches a point, that there no longer needs to be quite such bounds in all respects of life, between "mine" and "thine"...

Socialism will work best in highly technologically advanced societies. Like that of Star Trek Next Generation, but we don't have to wait for space travel.

But DO try and think outside, well, outside of what a few more privileged middle class progressives want... Even if an American leader, nowadays, were to think, wait for it, like HITLER - ie, "Let's give the masses work and bread", ie, at least moderately adequate salaries including health benefits, or free health care, for the MASS of people (now there's a policy for you to adopt! SOCIALIZED medicine! MOST American people want it, I think you will find, and I think that is precisely what Michael Moore's next film is going to prove. But YOUR precious party doesn't want to provide it - because WHO is going to be offended - that's right, the insurance corporations!! Who represent NO-ONE but their own pockets: still, that's who you're all dancing attendance round...)

Yeah, a Hitler could do better than a Bush!! Not that I want to see either! I only mentioned that because you don't win because you don't appeal to the masses; and over 50% do not vote AT ALL, anyway!

I read all the liberal sites! I just think that... the arguments about nurturant v. authoritarian family models are kind of intriguing...

But, basically, you're all getting bogged down in arguments, such as "liberal versus libertarian"...

Which most Americans don't give a rat's ass about anyway... I'll bet anything!

I certainly wouldn't give a rat's ass what jingoist said if I had to work in ****ing WalCrap and not get any health care....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since many more Americans are like Homer Simpson...
Posted by: Lizka on Jun 7, 2005 7:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... than they are like kittnboi, and I believe this, although a simplification, to be true... good LUCK! Is all I can say to that one! What hard-working lower-middle-class person wants to live as if they were POOR? I know I wouldn't! That's what motivates Americans to work - so they don't have to live like the Third World... HERE the conservatives, for once, are right!

I'm sorry, but you're trying to appeal to a type of environmentalist/hippy upper-middle-class guilt, that is only present in a tiny minority of people... And has nothing to do with who runs the country anyway.

WHY don't we put more research into cheap/alternative/free sources of energy? Even CRAZY ideas? Go looking for "free energy" on the net and see what you find! Zero-point energy. Tesla machines. And so on and so forth... goes a bit further than just manufacturing hydrogen fuel cells!

Well, on a different yet still futuristic note, they've invented a machine than levitates, recently - it levitates things like stones! Makes 'em float in mid-air. It was in something like the Guardian newspaper. I'll look up the reference sometime if asked...

Marvels are there to those prepared to look...

People you must think outside the box... rather than try to live in a cardboard one.

I'd give all the "nutty scientists" in the world - the nuttiest ones I could find, only not military ones, ESPECIALLY all the "amateurs" - because they're the ones who in history who have made all the discoveries - piles and piles of funding!

If I ruled the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But you can get lattes from McDonalds!
Posted by: Lizka on Jun 7, 2005 7:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And Starbucks! And so on....

I agree though. Those redstate rednecks are ignorant pigs.

What if a party were to offer them reliable jobs, though, at decent rates of pay? (Well, to everybody, to their urban brethren as well, naturally.)

Even a progressive-hating Frenchie-hating redneck couldn't pass that one up!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Un-framing?
Posted by: thweems on Jun 7, 2005 7:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Lakoff is quite correct that "framing" the political debate is a weapon that the right-wing uses much more effectively than progressives. However, his idea of "re-framing" the issues with some kind of "nurturing family" paradigm sort of bugs me. It just seems so artificial. Isn't "framing" really just another word for "spin"? If we want to gain traction in the public sentiment, shouldn't we cut through all that crap and speak to real issues with straightforwardness and sincerity? Or do we want to throw in our own "counter-spin" to further confuse people?

Don't get me wrong - I think the subject of "framing" is very important and we have to understand it. But I think we need to study this in order to figure out how to *de-construct* these right-wing frames, rather than launching some new exercise in triangulation like the Democrats in Washington.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Un-framing? Posted by: JoshM