Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Finding Spirit Among the Dems

By Evan Derkacz, AlterNet. Posted February 10, 2006.


Michael Lerner lays down a vision for a strong and successful Left -- but first it'll have to tackle its own demons.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

More stories by Evan Derkacz

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"Americans give a tremendous amount of credit to anyone who can name a pain that they've been experiencing but have been unable to locate," writes Michael Lerner in his new book "The Left Hand of God: Taking Our Country Back From the Religious Right" (HarperSF, 2006). (Full disclosure: The rabbi was also, at one time, my employer).

Every once in a while a book or an idea comes along that doesn't just change the view so much as it changes our way of viewing. George Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant" was one such book and "The Left Hand of God" has the stuff to be its heir.

In Lerner's view, the Religious Right's considerable political power is the result of, not so much a particular liturgy or ideology, but its ability to locate this pain. More important, therefore, than its current domination of the federal government is that long after its allies are gone from office, the ability for the Religious Right to dictate the terms of the debate itself -- from tax cuts to war to civil rights for gays and reproductive freedom for women -- will remain unless something is done to change course. A few victories in the upcoming election isn't enough.

Having focused on short-term battles like ending this or that war and localized social justice issues, the inability of the Left in general, and the Democrats in particular, to insert these crucial issues into a larger framework that speaks to the deeper needs of many Americans, threatens to marginalize progressive and liberal ideas even further.

Ben Franklin's definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Here's Lerner's take on the Left:

Instead of trying to understand the religious Right ... the Left tries to point out the irrationality of the Right's positions, imagining that one more good argument will knock the socks off the Rightists, and then everyone will throw away their crutches and start a stampede to the Left. Imagine their surprise when it doesn't happen.

Using decades of interviews from his Institute for Labor and Mental Health and examples ripped from the headlines, Lerner has written a book that challenges assumptions on both the Left and Right, eschewing musty old arguments and putting forward a bold plan for progressive ideas to gain a foothold in the public debate. Along the way it's sure to piss off more than a few readers.

First, just briefly explain what the Left Hand of God means.

The Left Hand of God means looking at the universe through the perception that love, kindness, generosity and caring for others are the central ontological realities of life, and that when they do not manifest in the world in which we live, the world is distorted and needs to be healed. The Right Hand of God, conversely, means looking at the universe through the perception that life is a struggle of all against all, and that the only path to security is through domination of others.

Regarding the quote above about the Left's mistaken view that all we really need is one more good argument, aren't you simply suggesting that one irrationality be replaced by another? Isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place?

What I'm suggesting in this paragraph is that many of the millions of people who get attracted to the Religious Right are not motivated by excitement for their political program, but by the experience of community, caring for others, and its ability to recognize and address the deep distortions in life that are caused by a societal ethos of materialism and selfishness.

You can't undermine that attachment by arguments against what is really peripheral to their motivation. Yet there is nothing fundamentally irrational about being motivated by a desire to be part of a loving community or to want a world with less materialism and selfishness. What is irrational is that the Left is unable to see that this very desire is a positive and healthy desire, and that it could best be addressed by a progressive spiritual critique of capitalist society which is, as I show in my book, the source of the materialism and seflishness that people are seeking to escape.

By its tone-deafness to the spiritual suffering of the American people, the Left continues to miss the fundamental crisis that demands a social transformation, and in so missing this reality, it clears the path for reactionary forces to enter the spiritual arena and manipulate that crisis in destructive and potentially fascistic directions.

One of the central questions Left Hand seeks to answer is, in effect, What's the Matter With Kansas? -- or why do people consistently vote against their best interests (i.e., Republican)? You have a different answer than Thomas Frank.

I believe that, as a methodological principle, we ought to try to find the rational kernel in the irrational shell, to coin a phrase, or to start by asking what reasonable and decent things people are seeking when they're attracted to the Right. Here, it is important to distinguish between the hard core of the Right -- which has many people who are racists, sexists, homophobes or fundamentalists with rigid thinking and sometimes filled with anger -- on the one hand, and the tens of millions of others who were not always attracted to the Right but who, in the past 30 years, have been moving to, and voting with, the Right.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Evan Derkacz is AlterNet's associate editor and writer of Peek, the blog of blogs.

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

Advertisement
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:
A Republican Persepective. . . .
Posted by: NthnBrazil on Feb 10, 2006 2:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am a pro-choice, pro-civil union, Alternet reading, Born-Again Christian Republican. I am Republican because I have never seen a single Democratic candidate I would be willing to vote for. In my many online disourses on various subjects it has been made clear to me that progressives in general can't understand how that can be and more often than not I come away at best mildly insulted and shaking my head, and at worst outright flamed. Rabbi Lerner has struck a nerve with me that I can't deny. Quotes that elicited an audible "Wow!":

Empathically put yourself in the place of people whose actions we don't agree with. Too often progressives can do that when it comes to foreign terrorists but can't do that when it comes to right-wing voters.

The prejudice of many people on the Left against religious and spiritual people, the view that they must necessarily be on a lower level of intellectual or psychological development if they believe in God, is a view that is elitist and destructive. We need to make that kind of elitism as unwelcome in the Left as we once had to make sexist or homophobic approaches to the world.

This man clearly "gets it" and in my opinion, if this is to be the left's new rallying cry, the right is in serious trouble. I'm very interested to see the average Alternet readers' response to this, since I am clearly an anomaly around these parts. I expect some big-time bristling (particularly at the comments I quoted), but progressives would do well to listen to Rabbi Lerner very closely.

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

» RE: A Republican Persepective. . . . Posted by: kelly.nickell
» You've missed the point Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: You've missed the point Posted by: kelly.nickell
» My mistake. . . Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: My mistake. . . Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: A Republican Persepective. . . . Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: A Republican Persepective. . . . Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: A Republican Creed Posted by: Michiganman
» Read it again Posted by: NthnBrazil
» Kerry was THE fiscal choice Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: ead it again Posted by: ozsea1
» RE: ead it again Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: ead it again Posted by: cwdalzell
» RE: ead it again Posted by: Patrissimo
» How? Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: How? Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: How? Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: How? Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: What about Jimmy Carter? Posted by: duck-lady
» RE: What about Jimmy Carter? Posted by: NthnBrazil
» Nope Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Nope Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Nope Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Nope Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Nope Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Nope Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Nope Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Nope Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: A Republican Persepective. . . . Posted by: DeanForMaryland
» We could just set a better example Posted by: Bic Pentameter
Michel Lerner gets it
Posted by: rbohan on Feb 10, 2006 3:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've got a blog devoted to the very issue of which Rabbi Lerner speaks.
(www.sundaymorningliberal.blog-city.com) That is, liberals have, for too long, denigrated and discounted people of faith and spirit. Until liberals start putting our views in distinctly moral terms, we'll continue to wring our hands outside the walls of power, wondering "why they just won't vote for us."

Notice, I said "put our views in moral terms". You can tell liberals don't get it when they ask, "Well, doesn't this all mean that we have to be anti-choice, anti-gay, and pro-corporate just like the fundamentalists?" Of course not. We don't gain influence by trying to co-opt their views. We gain influence by couching our views in terms of morals and values. For example, what is it that keeps us from saying that it's a SIN that all God's children can't get good health care? It's a SIN when any of God's children must go to school with chunks of plaster falling from their classroom ceilings. If we weren't so religio-phobic to begin with, such statements would come more naturally to us...and we'd have more impact.

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

» RE: Michel Lerner gets it Posted by: kelly.nickell
» rbohan GOOD TACTIC Posted by: Michiganman
» RE: Michel Lerner gets it Posted by: Andie927
I respectfully agree and disagree
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Feb 10, 2006 4:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, I agree that ridiculing the religious right is counterproductive. Second, I agree that the Alito hearing would have been handled better by the Democrats refusing to participate in the charade,

"Money in politics is distorting, but let's not forget that the impact of the civil rights movement, the women's movement and the anti-Vietnam War movement was greater than any amount of money could ever purchase."

Here is the crux of the matter. These three movements ran counter to the established political parties. The Democratic leadership only embraced these causes when they were forced to by the rank and file.

Today we have "big money" controlling both parties. It is no accident that the parties are Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. Both parties serve the corporatocracy.

The way to counter this is for the people to make their demands on both parties and to refuse to participate in an election charade that will only decide which party carries out the agenda of the establishment.

Join The Lincoln Initiative a grassroots movement with no leaders, no contributions, no registration, no meetings, no marches, and no hassle. Help make "government of the people, by the people and for the people" a reality. Click on Join today

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

» RE: I respectfully agree and disagree Posted by: kelly.nickell
If I must choose...
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Feb 10, 2006 4:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a candidate based on his moral character and that alone, then I have already lost, as can be evidenced by the events of say the last ten years.

An American president, seen as morally bankrupt for a blowjob and a lie.

An American president hailed as morally nailed together, with a history of lies that many still deny are even occuring.

The answers for me come easy on this, and I do not even have to put in a call to my God for guidance.

Let me choose my leader as one built through high moral character, displayed through his actions, not what he professes.

The right has far fewer examples of this trait than the left, again, simple for me.

The actions rule, not the tripe of professed faith.

Show me, don't tell me.

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

» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: Colin
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: Colin
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» We all must choose... Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: We all must choose... Posted by: Colin
» RE: We all must choose... Posted by: Sojourner
» PS Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: We all must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: We all must choose... Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: We all must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: If I must choose... Posted by: munchkinpup
Begging on bended knee? NOT....
Posted by: Michiganman on Feb 10, 2006 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I find this article somewhat helpful most of it is a pipedream. The religious right was highjacked by lies and deception. They were fed their own dogma and it worked. It's amazing they haven't noticed that non of their hot button issues were acted upon. Abortion is still legal, stem cells are still used, gays have more rights than ever. Yet they continue to swallow the lies of the booshies as long as they keep saying -God bless amerika.
The thought that greed and corruption is sinful could be the rallying cry. The administration is SINNING. This may be a better strategy. Along with announcing that democrats are NOT ALL leftist and liberals. The repugs painted this picture and it must be erased. Don't get me wrong I am a liberal lefty but the painfull truth is we are or WERE a minority in the democratic party.
I say ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK, scream yell and filibuster! Stand up you spineless Dems!
Of course this whole discussion is worthless till we get the lobbyists out of Washington and support government funded elections. God knows there are just as many crooked corporate sucking dems as ther are repugs.
Anyway I doubt pitching woo to the religious right is going to do any good unless we can convince them the government is SINFULL! And that their repug administration is sining. Use their fear of HELL against them just as the repugs did, minus the countless lies and greed.

Disclaimer: I don't believe in hell.

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

The Rabbi has hit the Right with a left to the liver
Posted by: eileenflmng on Feb 10, 2006 6:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Speaking as a Christian of The Beatitudes, I have found the Insight, Wisdom and Compassion of Rabbi Lerner to be a "left to the liver" to the right wing and wrong thinking.


Read about some of The first International Spiritual Progressives Conference conceived by Rabbi Lerner and implemeted by the TIKKUN Community in July 2005 in Chapter II Keep Hope Alive II
FREELY AVAILABLE ON WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org

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

Spiritual people and atheists can find common ground in this
Posted by: CrystalD on Feb 10, 2006 6:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"love and caring for others, generosity and kindness, ecologically sensitive behavior, ethical awareness, and enhance our capacities to respond to the universe with awe and wonder at the grandeur of creation."

Lots and lots of atheists and agnostics feel this way, too!

While I definitely agree that it's wrong to disparage spiritual people and paint them with the Religious Right brush, a desire for a more caring, less selfish, and alltogether better world for everyone crosses religious and non-religious boundaries. I hope that atheists and religious people and those who are "spiritual but not religious" can stop disparaging and mocking one another, put aside their differences and put their energy towards working for a better, more caring world for everyone - religious and agnostic alike.

Unchecked capitalism, not religion (or lack of it) is the enemy. Look at Norway and Sweden - they are not religious at all but seem to have made a better quality of life for their citizens than most other places.

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

right coin, wrong side
Posted by: shula weiner on Feb 10, 2006 6:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that many "Christians'" identification with our Neocon regime is probably quite rational. Essentially, they're joining the Nazi party. Religion is a facade for absolute devotion to whatever the leaders require. Fanaticism is mandatory. Why such a radical choice? Because to many it appears the only one available for little people who perceive a world run by corrupt gangs. Liberals, progressives, Democrats talk about values but do little to address terrible inequalities in this nation. Their ineptitude at organizing is truly amazing. It suggests that deep down they share the basic concern of people on the Right: can the Neocons succeed at their program, however deplorable this program may be. Can they bully the world into submission, even if this means slaughtering millions of people in the Asian and African world? Even if it means far less Democracy locally? If they can succeed, then people in this country will experience less hardship than others as the energy crisis deepens. We'll all get through it in pretty good shape. The Neocons imply that they can indeed pull it off. They are the toughest, meanest ganlords in the world.

Evidence fails to support this claim, but the Left fails to present it. The left harps on Neocon ruthlessness and dishonesty. Just the qualities you need in a bad ass gang.

The Christian Right is not about love, its about survival, whatever the cost to others. For Calvin's chosen, the end always justified the means.

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

Our Common Condition
Posted by: flawedplan on Feb 10, 2006 6:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with NthnBrazil and am wondering if the other commenters have read the same article as I just did.

"Pain, meaning, emotional needs, respect"-- this isn't about God, it's about psychology. Hearts and minds, motivation and feelings, which we stubbornly devalue and ignore at our peril.

I am both a DNC activist and mental health consumer, and run a leftish message board on psychiatric advocacy, and find a complete disconnect between the two populations. Fellow leftists regard me as something of a freak, and fellow psychiatric consumers just don't get what politics has to do with our common condition.

We are psychological beings, that's what this article is about, an inquiry into how people are put together, and the implications that follow.

It's time for too-cool leftists to wake up to the psychological vulnerabilities that capture and ensnare voters, regardless how close to home the investigation leads.

Speak truth to that power for a change.

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

» Ironic isn't it? Posted by: NthnBrazil
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: sln70
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: sln70
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: deha
» RE: Ironic isn't it? Posted by: kelly.nickell
Blogs as Church
Posted by: haystack1317 on Feb 10, 2006 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is absolutely true that the left's unwillingness to look closely at questions of spirituality is one of its major weaknesses. This is true not only in terms of appealing to the average voter but also in terms of the lack of unity and vision in the progressive movement itself. It is within human nature to look for something larger and deeper than everyday existence. It is also within human nature to seek out a "tribe" of one's own. This gets channeled in many ways. Many of these impulses are actually being met right now, as I type out these words and as you read them. The act of creating something is, perhaps unconsciously to many, a sharing in the explosion of the creative energy at the foundation of our existence. It is rewarding. The seeking out of community is also reflected here. We wouldn't be taking the time to express ourselves if we weren't seeking out the response. Many of those participating in progressive blogs are, in my opinion, seeking out the same sorts of communities that others seek in church. At the end of the day, finding that a common thought or feeling is shared with a stranger, and that all together have aspired to find a way to transcend the troubling aspects of everyday life, is a commonality between this blog and many of the churches that would be ridiculed by the left.

I think the author is correct in pointing out that the left ignores what draws the average American into the arms of the Christian Right at its peril. The essential message of Christ was "love your enemy as yourself." That is the message that appeals to people, often because they themselves feel a need to be loved that way, despite their sins, despite their weaknesses, their failings, etc. That essential message can cut through anything, as we have seen. In almost every case, however, it is so powerful that those seeking power latch onto it and use it for personal gain. The ultimate example? Pat Robertson, who, if he truly followed Christ's teachings, would have to have himself assassinated, since he'd love himself in the way he loves Hugo Chavez. But people adhere to Pat Robertson because they've felt that deep spiritual connection to Christ at some point and once they're on the other side of it they seek someone who has shared that experience, someone who knows, who's there with them. After a profound spiritual experience such as this, anyone who claims to have experienced the same thing has an enormous advantage over someone who belittles that thing. Reason and logic and intellect are not a part of this. Spirituality, in the view of many of those who have immersed themselves in it, at least in the case of the Christian Right in this country, is viewed as transcending those things.

There are, of course, those on the Christian Right who put Jesus' teaching about loving one's enemy far behind doctrines of hatred. The bible is intentionally arranged to contain the radical message of all-encompassing love, which is what hits people deeply initially, while also containing passages that can justify just about any action one wants to take. Still, at the end of the day, I firmly believe that most American Christians were drawn to their religion because of the unconditional love it promised them and, by extension, everyone in the world. If we only look at the distortions and power-plays, we are missing the essence of it, and those who would use religion for their own personal gain will continue to have the upper hand.

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

» RE: Blogs as Church Posted by: Lizka
» RE: Blogs as Church Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Blogs as Church Posted by: haystack1317
» RE: Blogs as Church Posted by: Lizka
I think the thing for all the too-cool-for-school Dems...
Posted by: Lizka on Feb 10, 2006 7:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and there are some, like, er, Jon Stewart (he always strikes me as a slimeball!)... is just to put out the message that they don't despise people of religious faith, or the idea of having a faith (and not just Islam or trendy Buddhism either) rather than that they are of that faith, or agree with it or something.

Of course, in the US there are these religious bigots who really do throw the whole thing off whack, because they want everybody to share their faith - which just ain't gonna happen!

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

What about the apolitical?
Posted by: dansjournal on Feb 10, 2006 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone relatively new to politics, I need to ask this very important question. How do we create political change when there are a great many people in this country who are both apolitical, and ignorant of so many of the issues. Beyond politics, how do we create a more progressive culture, when so many people are largely unaware that there are people trying to create a more progressive America.

I'm talking about people who go to work, come home, have dinner, maybe watch some ESPN, watch some movies on the weekend, and then repeat. I'm talking about kids who are in school from 8-3, do their homework, play their sports or instruments, and go to bed. I'm talking about the great majority of college students who sit in lecutres, study, socialize, and do a wide range of things that are unique to being a college student, but not necessarily including talking about politics, culture, or activism.

Michael Lerner has definately addressed a key issue that simply needs to be addressed in order to affect change, however, there is still this other looming issue of people who are not intentionally ignorant, and who are not stupid, but who simply go about their lives without giving any thought to these issues. Not everyone has the privilage of time, energy, and knowledge to become involved in this type of movement. Does anyone else agree that this is an issue that is equally as large as the spiritual crisis of the Left that Michael Lerner has written about, and that in fact, it's lack of attention as an issue reflects just how necessary it is to begin to somehow build this issue, on Alternet and elsewhere, into part of this national conversation?

-Dan Lilienthal
www.xanga.com/dansjournal

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

God, Ethics and Poltics
Posted by: stormchilde1975 on Feb 10, 2006 8:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't believe Rabbi Lerner is advocating that politicians misrepresent themselves as members of the faiths of those whose votes they want. That would be deeply disingenuous.
There is a language of spirituality that transcends specific faiths - epitomized in one of the above posters' admonition to "check the specifics at the door". In this language, we can appeal to people who need to see in their would-be leaders a sense of purpose, an inspiration for progress that transcends the painful material web most of us are hopelessly trapped in. If our vision for the future isn't inspired, it isn't going to inspire others. We don't need to say God, Jesus, Heaven or Hell to transmit a spiritual message - we just need to advocate compassion and goodness for their own sakes.
Much more to the point: THE LEFT MUST STOP DENIGRATING FAITH! Every time we do this, we drive another person who desperately wants to be good into the arms of poison-mongers. If there is no home for people of faith among progressives they won't abandon their faiths. They'll abandon us. They are abandoning us, and this among other things accounts for the shift to the right in this country. Right-wing politics may offer an abusive and dysfunctional home for people of faith, but at least it lets them in.

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

» RE: God, Ethics and Poltics Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: God, Ethics and Poltics Posted by: stormchilde1975
» Right On Posted by: sln70
» It can not happen Posted by: Iconoclast421
» I disagree Posted by: stormchilde1975
» RE: It can not happen.....Oh Yeah! Posted by: mikespindell
» I dont see how you can say that.... Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Nixon/Kennedy debates Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: IMAGE VS RHETORIC Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: IMAGE VS RHETORIC Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: Nixon/Kennedy debates.......? Posted by: mikespindell
» WHAT?? Posted by: sln70
» RE: WHAT?? Posted by: Iconoclast421
Left chases donors, not voters
Posted by: osisbs on Feb 10, 2006 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Seriously, when was the last time a Democratic presidential candidate rallied the workers at a fast-food joint and asked for their votes because he was interested in their well-being? If you cannot write a check for $500 on the spot, then it's a given that the candidate isn't standing anywhere near you.
You won't attract angry God believers because they do not have the mental capacity to understand arguments not based on fear or threats or fire or brimstone. Give up on them, they are lost.

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

» RE: Left chases donors, not voters Posted by: stormchilde1975
» Everyone chases donors Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: veryone chases donors Posted by: Lizka
A Spiritual ProgressiveL Left Requires Mental Health
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 10, 2006 10:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Neuroscience tells us that basic religious/spiritual tapes(neural tracks) are set before age 5. A spiritual progressive left is important. Kudos to Rabbi Lerner. Sanity is also important- a party and people based on the fundamentals of mental health which includes a spiritual component. The opposite- organized religion-especially fundamentalist religion is pyschopathology that no political party can possibly over come. Former State Sen John Vasconcellos (D-CA) had it write. So does David Boulton of www.implicity.org. Early childhood education is the "key to the kingdom"

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

jareilly
Posted by: jareilly on Feb 10, 2006 10:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, "the Left" is not the same as the Dem party. There is some nose-holding crossover at election time but there it ends. The mainstream Dems are not on the Left by any reasonable definition of the term "Left". They do not support more equitable distribution of wealth and wealth-producing resources. They do no oppose foreign, imperial military adventures, they do support what is called "free trade". There are numerous other significant differences.
How does that relate to this article? Because, like so many other commentaries, this article conflates "the Left" and the Dems. The Repubs are the biggest and most cynical purveyors of this distortion, which they spent 8 years hurling at Bill Clinton, a plainly rightwing Dem, in both policy and public comments.
Another cynical Repub-originated distortion here is the idea that Dems are constantly mocking, insulting, denigrating, attacking the faithful. There is no such social trend, except in the fevered imagination of the Repubs. "the Left" and the Dems both having being tying themselves in pretzel knots trying to accommodate the ever more shrill, hypersensitive, unreality-based religious Right for years. (And spare me Bill Maher's snide blather. He is not even slightly on the Left. See his nasty interview with Mother Jones a few years ago). Neither the Left nor the Dems are attacking religion or religious people. Some of us have attacked their ideas, policies and politics and well we should. But in the unhinged vortex of "Right" thinking, to disagree is to harm, to discriminate, to oppress. Everything is an attack according to this worldview. Note the deranged "War on Christmas" crap.
So, the Dems are not part of the Left (a statement with which the essentially the entire Dem party would now agree) and neither the Dems nor the Left is really attacking the religious among us. Then what are we really talking about here? Actually, we are trying to defend ourselves against an identity and behavior fabricated for us by the Right and the urban myth machine. Not guilty on either charge.
Leave pursuit of matters spiritual to those so inclined. Of ourse we can put our moral position in religious terms. We can find scripture that supports our view. They've already cherry-picked the Bible, but they left the "lilies of the field" to us. We can use it, but having used it we better be able to deliver. We need Dem or independent candidates who offer real material gains to voters. Better health care, better education, no more Abramoff style bribery and Enron style theft, no more imperial military adventures, sane energy policy. Once voted in Dems must fight for these things and occasionally win, even if they often don't win with a Repub-controlled Congress. Until that happens, nothing is going to change, no matter how many times we politely, sincerely reach out to religious Right voters. It's that simple. I don't know why that point still eludes so many of us.

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

» RE: jareilly Posted by: osisbs
» RE: jareilly-TOO CYNICAL Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: jareilly-TOO CYNICAL Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: jareilly Posted by: jareilly
» RE: osisbs :) Posted by: AlienSlave
» AGREE 10,000% jareilly Posted by: Michiganman
» RE: jareilly Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: jareilly Posted by: outsidea
» RE:JOSEPH- FACISM IS DEAD IN US! Posted by: drricklippin
You said what I've been struggling to say
Posted by: DianeSilver on Feb 10, 2006 11:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Michael Lerner! You said what I've been struggling to say in a variety of posts at In This Moment

I attempted this in The Lesbian and the Fundamentalists

I've also talked about this at Talk To Action, a terrific site where folks are attempting to figure out how to counter the Religious Right.

And while this comment is, of course, shameless self promotion, it is also an honest and sincere wish of thanks. You've put into words the concept of what's missing -- what's this hole in our society -- better than I could. Most of all, I believe it is important to say what you've said. There IS a reason why people go to these churches. I don't agree with a thing the Religious Right says, but their churches draw people because they are meeting a real need.

We cannot win politically or even survive the Culture War (a lousy term, but good short-hand for now) without understanding this important fact. Again, many thanks!

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

NO, not Understand
Posted by: Andie927 on Feb 10, 2006 12:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
REMOVE! Remove them from Politics, or Remove their TAX-EXEMPT STATUS! Remove ALL of Bush's "Faith-Based" Bought and paid for Votes! Let me tell You, Religion in this country, is a Big Busines! Threaten their money, and they'll go home with their tail between their legs!

I read your comment, and as many of the rest as I can stomach!

I really don't care what 'YOU' think is a sin, according to your Religion! That's the problem not the solution. You don't get it! There are hundreds of denominations of Christians, and You wouldn't believe the major differences between just them. Then you have the Catholics, Jewish, Hindu, Buddihist, and Islamic. Now, you have to take into consideration, the agnostic and athiest!

THAT'S WHY OUR CONSTITUTION STATES; SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!

That's why ANY church that gets involved in Politics, should loose it's tax exempt status!!!

You talk about, Progressives Pre-Judging "southern right-wing evangelical religous-right" as ignorant! Then you turn around and Pre-Judge all Progressives! Well your wrong! On both counts!

I LOVE, Jimmy Carter! He's a truely great man, and very religous! Try reading his NEW book. He walked out on the Southern Baptist Confrence. Look up the Interfaith Allience, again very religous! They believe religion should stay OUT of politics!

You have every right to practice your religions, have your moral values, YOU do not have the right to Impose your religion on me or anyone else!

THAT'S WHY THIS IS A FREE COUNTRY! So everyone has the right to practice or NOT, their religion their own way! It does NOT mean you have the right to "Force" your moral values on ME!

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

» RE: NO, not Understand Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: NO, not Understand Posted by: Lizka
» RE: NO, not Understand Posted by: CrouchingGringo
» RE: NO, not Understand Posted by: gonzoskismet
JOHN VASCONCELLOS-POLITICS OF TRUST
Posted by: drricklippin on Feb 10, 2006 1:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Former State Senator (D-CA) John Vasconcellos began WWW.POLITICSOFTRUST.NET John in a Rogerian humanist but I believe he has a deep spiritual essence. Anyway his program is a winner.:)

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

Bad Press
Posted by: gonzoskismet on Feb 10, 2006 2:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, folks, God and the Devil have really gotten some bad press over the centuries. Think about it. We go to war in Gods name. If we lose, we blame it on the Devil. Actually, they are just extentions of our own guilty consciences about the vile things that we do against our fellow man in their names. It's always handy to have someone else to blame.
Don't get me wrong. I believe in a Supreme Being. I just don't believe that He/She/It wants us to tell other people how to live their lives. Nor that He/She/It wants us to elect officials because of our beliefs that will dictate how other people live. Nor do I believe that they have put judgement of our fellow man in our hands. They knew even from the beginning that we couldn't handle that kind of power.
I voted Dem in the last election but it was like eatting a turd. I hated the bastard that they ran almost as much as I hated the one that he ran against. But we have to come to a common ground on this issue, people. I don't hate Fundementalist or Christians in general UNLESS they try to force feed me on what they believe. I will not tolerate that type of behaviour.
I am Native American. I was raised in the Christian Faith and was baptisted in the name of Jesus, but it didn't take. Slide right off like Teflon because I was also raised in the Native American faith and it stuck tighter than the Christian teachings. I've seen it work with my own eyes. I've felt the Truth of it in my soul. I don't say Christians are right or wrong but they are wrong for me. That's the number one foundation of our freedom. You are FREE to believe whatever religious belief works for you.
But here's the rub. When you use it for political gain, which seems to be the issue here, it is an EVIL thing. It is a crime against the idea of freedom. It is a travesty against the idea of democracy.
I have known exactly three TRUE Christians in my life that I could sit down and discuss religous experiences with on an equal status. That's a sad commentary on religous tolerance in the nation. And as far as the political left and right goes, well, seems as if THEIR GODS are popularity, money and power. Let the true believers IN America step up for election and I will vote for them.
I've read the Bible and it contains a vast amount of wisdom that could benefit the human race. I've read the Koran and it also contains a vast amount of wisdom that could benefit the human race. As do the Vedas. As does the Torah.
But this wisdom is also mixed in with a lot of things that could be harmful to the human race. Sift out the prejudice and you have the wisdom and as a species on this planet, we must do the sifting or perish as a species on this planet.

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

Elections
Posted by: haystack1317 on Feb 10, 2006 2:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In another post I've been discussing the cartoon which circulated widely after the 2004 election in which all the so-called "red states" were labeled "Jesusland." This was posted all over the place, on the Michael Moore website, etc., and seemed to get a lot of positive response from progressives. Several people e-mailed it to me.

I was surprised by the popularity of this cartoon because it displayed a sweeping stereotype that I wouldn't have expected from the progressive community. It's a very clear example of what the far right would like for moderate Christians to believe the progressive community thinks about them. It played directly into the hands of fundamentalist Christians.

I think there are a large number of moderate Christians who have been pulled to the right in spite of instincts to the contrary. People seem to react with incredible cynicism to this idea, but look at it in terms of elections. What percentage of moderate Christians would have to switch from the Republican to the Democratic party to shift the balance of power in this country? (I'm not debating whether the Democrats are truly left, of course. I'm looking at getting the power out of Bush's hands in any way possible as a good first step away from Fascism.) Is it unreasonable to think that this number could be won over? I don't think so. A first step would be staying away from ridiculing the spiritual experiences that many consider the most important aspects of their lives.

(Of course I'm talking about moderates who have been voting Republican, not Christian Democrats.)

I'm sure plenty of people will call me naive and a propagandist for Bush, as I have already been called. All I'm suggesting, though, is that some number of these moderate Christians could be convinced to vote for the Democratic Party if more efforts were put into that area. I honestly feel that the number could be enough to shift the balance of power in this country. (If our elections aren't continually stolen by the far right, that is.)

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

» --from a quick Web search Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: elections Posted by: outsidea
logos
Posted by: logos on Feb 10, 2006 2:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spiritual rhetoric is neither the problem nor the solution to the left's electoral problems. Religion is not the primary ideology of our age in America. Capitalism is. Religion is no longer taken for granted. When everybody is screaming about it we have to look for the unacknowleged assumption that propels people. People desperately want to believe that "everybody can get rich if they follow the rules." All belief systems promise something. Religion promises salvation and heaven. Capitalism promises prosperity and riches. These belief systems do not have to work; what matters is the belief. Sorry, wrong target here. When you hear and see a lot of hand wringing on your telly about people who are flouting the rules of capitalism as proclaimed in some book you'll have a chance.

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

» RE: logos Posted by: gonzoskismet
Organized Religion has been the Leading Cause of Death...
Posted by: starvinmarvy on Feb 10, 2006 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Organized Religion...over the centuries..AND TOO THIS DAY
...has been the reason for more death on this planet than any other reason. That means Christianity too. Although this country was pretty much founded on this religion(I my self was raised Catholic) ....it STILL is at the core..of most of our problems here in our country. And all over our mother earth! How sad is this?
With the new wave of Non-denominational..Spirituality that
alot of us are becoming in tune with...we realize imediately
the mis-leading ways of former places of worship. Although
we`re becoming more "aware" of who we are and where we
we go when we"pass"...and more sensitive to "truth"...we in turn also become more sensitive to the "bullshit" And lately
our "bullshit meters" are pegging real high!!
BUT...although we`re losing our "faith" so to speak all the while becoming "aware" we CAN`T put a LABEL on just who
or what we are.We`re not unified so to speak under a particular label!! Not Catholic,Protestant,ect. I feel this in turn
HURTS our progressive movement. I`m reading people here saying well "hey...I`m a Christian so I had to vote for the conservative side"!! Here again folks....we got a major problem for every soul on this planet! So...until we come to
a crossroads so to speak...on what happens to us when we depart this particular plane/demension.....we`re gonna keep
killing each other off....in a desperate attempt ...to survive!!

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

Jesus was a progressive
Posted by: smccaw on Feb 10, 2006 2:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very well-put. I am amazed at how little both those on the Left, and many of those who profess to be born-again Christians, understand about the true nature of Christ's ministry and his social message. He was not only a progressive, but a radical who inspired fear in those he opposed.
Jesus went around stirring up opposition to both an invading and occupying foreign power and a corrupt Jewish religious establishment which had sold itself for money and power under Pontius Pilate, Rome's vile local governor. They were directly equivalent to the Vichy French government under Hitler. Jesus called for a cleaning out of this Temple establishment and a rebirth of the Jewish faith in the common people. (Jesus wasn't a Christian; he was Jewish. Imagine that!) He expected the Kingdom of God to occur on earth among people of faith. He presented a threat to this elite religious/economic/political cabal and they had him killed. He knew they would kill him, but challenged them anyway. He knew precisely how it was to be done. Imagine the spectre of crucifixion hanging over your head for three years, but plunging on anyway. I freely admit to a lack of such courage.
One doesn't have to follow him in a religious way to be inspired by such an example. Think of Martin Luther King: he was following directly in Christ's footsteps. He knew how the story would end for him, but not for the movement. If one professes religious faith in Christ, his example demands action on behalf of the poor and the oppressed, and challenging those who profit from their misery.
If Jesus were to return today and challenge the religious/economic/political powers that be in the same way, they would have him killed, there is no doubt. That's what makes the story so amazing: it's universality. So, whether you are a Christian or not, religious or not, study this man to learn how the genuine Jesus can inform our work. We need to throw his message directly at the Right. They don't get him, but we can and must.

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

» RE: Jesus was a progressive Posted by: gonzoskismet
» RE: Jesus was a progressive Posted by: smccaw
» RE: Jesus was a progressive Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Jesus was a progressive Posted by: mikespindell
» RE: Jesus was a progressive Posted by: outsidea
Missing the point, once again....
Posted by: xenacat on Feb 10, 2006 3:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... "many of the millions of people who get attracted to the Religious Right are not motivated by excitement for their political program, but by the experience of community, caring for others, and its ability to recognize and address the deep distortions in life that are caused by a societal ethos of materialism and selfishness." Sorry to weigh in so late on this issue - I'm hip deep in the materialism and selfishness that requires me to work 2 jobs just to be able to live indoors. One more job and maybe I'll get to dig me a dandy outhouse just like great grandpa had... might be able to afford a shovel then. Praise be to Dubya and his followers! This statement of why folks join the religous right is purely BS of the highest order. I'll damn well bet that true spiritual searching is the least of it. The folks that I know that are "religous right" -and there are mulitudes in my neck of the woods - ARE zealots who feel that GOD will reward materially them for their blind devotion to religous "leaders" who are, in essence, corporate shills. Experience of community and caring for others rates pretty far down on these peoples' lists as well. Progressives need to understand that the motivation for hatred and bigotry is not at all involved with true spiritual seeking, as suggested by this article. We shouldn't mistake folks who selfishly use religon as a means to prop up thier own narrow and uncompassionate viewpoints as true spiritual seekers. Most of these folks who follow the conservative agenda do so simply because extreme conservatives appear to be the winners right now. Ascribing any deeper motivation to them than that is just plain foolishness. The best thing for us to do is show some damn backbone, not engage in debates about why, not search for the non-existant good in obvious bigotry but to simply tell these nuts "Hell no, go kiss some snakes if that's what tickles you, but leave the rest of us alone" and mean it. We need progressive leaders who have the cajones to stand up and say enough is enough. So far, though, all we have are articles like this one...totally useless in the actual fight against the new religious dark age that has already engulfed us.

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

Jesus said it
Posted by: macdon1 on Feb 10, 2006 11:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even Jesus told us "to render to Ceasar that which is Ceasar's and to God, that which is God's" He meant that civil government was not there to shove belief down people's throats and believers were to lead by example "by their acts ye shall know them" The acts of those in the current administration can only be regarded as scandalous and clearly wrong according to scripture. I don't know what Bible the Bushites are reading but it sure isn't the one I have here. I guess they only read John 3:16
and left out the rest.

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

RE-Religions(mind poisons)-vs-Spirituality(heart smarts)
Posted by: TheJamea on Feb 10, 2006 8:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about enlightened self interest? A rilly simple example: if I can bring myself to keep a positive atttitude during my day in the world, even smiling occasionaly, I get that back, with interest, albeit sometimes not much interest. It doesn't take much to see that if you treat everyone with honesty and integrity, in the main, what you'll get back is more of the same. You still have to defend yourself against pathological criminals, but you have more energy to do so, not having to struggle against gratuitous reaction to your own bad attitude. And, like smiling being easier than frowning, after a little practice, it becomes pretty much habit. Is this spiritual or rational? I vacillate between Pantheism and humanism. I detest most institutionalized religions as having co-opted whatever core message their Prophet attempted to convey, into their own overweaning desire for power over others.
TheJames

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

AND ALSO...
Posted by: TheJamea on Feb 10, 2006 9:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jesus did not proselytize. He was willing to engage and converse deeply with his FOLLOWERS, those who followed him around to get his message of deep faith in the goodness of LIFE and LOVE. That is not the message of those who come to your door to explain to you that you are lost if you do not follow their forms. How dare you tell me that I cannot be a moral being if I do not DO IT YOUR WAY. Just a little addendum of MORAL outrage.
TheJames

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

» largely off-topic musings Posted by: Michelle
"FINDING SPIRIT AMONG THE DEMS"
Posted by: picket on Feb 11, 2006 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For those here that are energetic enough to read through all the excellent comments it might be helpful to reread Michael Lerner's interview.

The comments are a real "study" in why we are told from a young age not to discuss politics or RELIGION at Thanksgiving Dinner!!!!!!!!![esp the "S" word, SINNNNNN.]

Lerner states that .......the major deficiet of the Left.....inadequate compassion for an understanding of the spiritual needs of the American People."

The point is DO NOT except anyone else's spiritual views. The point is the Dems are again on the losing end and time is running out. Remember how we thought that Kerry would come out TODAY with a profound statement that would put Bush down. It never happened and the way things are going it 's not going to happen anytime soon. The Dem leadership apparently has a plan, but for the "average" citizen it won't change their life.

My passion is to see the life of EVERY CITIZEN worth living. Bush is not the LEADER that can deliver that vision. The extreme political right will not change. Maybe the extreme political left will not be open to suggestions or change either. So we have to shift just a LITTLE to the middle and MAKE the DEM leadership open their eyes. Twenty causes will ALL lose. Lerner's view is a winner.

Re spiritual/religious views. personally I have very strong ones,and I am very secure, so when my views are ridiculed HERE or at other liberal sites, I swallow hard, and remember that the Repubs have the POWER and they have failed miserably. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" works for MOST humans but certainly no ALL, esp the REPUBS!!!!!

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

So, I'm a prejudiced bigot am I?
Posted by: ericvonfleet on Feb 11, 2006 10:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a liberal/progressive I take seriously the charge of prejudice. In response I must say that if Lerner's assertion is true that otherwise progressively minded people are voting Republican because that party more effectively caters to their psychological/spiritual needs, then it only serves to highlight how dysfunctional and irrational religious people can be. He suggests that these people want to be part of a loving community, a world with less materialism and selfishness. But because the left is not more overtly spiritual and actually has, as part of it's membership, people who vocally dissent on the subject. Then they choose to vote for an agenda that is the complete antithesis of what they claim they want to be a part of. What an unbelievable display of arrogance and spitefullness.

Let me be clear. As someone with an agnostic and humanistic world view I obviously disagree with all the hocus pocus of the religionists. And if someone wants to debate the subject, then I'm fully prepared to passionately defend my position. I will not allow some demagogue to kow-tow me into silence with charges of bigotry and prejudice in relation to this issue any more than I would allow my opposition to the war to be silenced by those who would question my patriotism.

I absolutely support the freedom of religion. And frankly I don't care what beliefs drive you to conclude that you favor universal health care, workers rights, public funding of campaigns, sustainable energy policy, or any of a host of other issues on the progressive agenda. The important thing is that whether you come to the public policy table from a religious world viewpoint or an agnostic one, once at the table we coalesce around these issues and together advance them forward. This childishness that Lerner and those of his ilk are exhibiting are the real impediments. This notion that they'll boycott progressivism because progressive agnostics like myself hurt their feelings when we mix it up over religion, or because we don't stroke their spiritual side, is simply untenable. Imagine for a minute if agnostics like myself were to take this same tack. Imagine if we were to sit down and say either come to the table and stroke our agnostism or we'll go vote Republican. Of course this would be absurd and counter-productive.

To the contrary, for the greatest part of my 37 years I have watched those of faith look disapprovingly at me and my lack of spirituality. I've listened to them condescendingly pledge to pray for me. And today I read one blogger who suggests that a lack of even a little spirituality calls into question one's sanity. In spite of these snide sentiments, I don't look at a Christian politician and think, "I know we agree on most issues but because you might offend me with your religious point of view I can't possibly vote for you." I vote for, and will continue to vote for Christians with whom I vehemently disagree with on the subject of religion. In contrast, I once saw a poll which indicated that only about 25% of Americans would consider voting for an agnostic for President. So then, I ask you, who are the real bigots? Christian or agnostic?

A 33 year old man was recently quoted in our local paper as saying that George W. Bush was the the greatest President of his lifetime because he leads with values. The man said that he would live in a cardboard box as long as his President put God first and foremost. Lerner maintains that leftists like me must choose between a progressive agenda or the freedom to defend my position on religiosity. I suggest to Lerner and his minions that theirs is not the only feathers that get ruffled. We all get knocked around a bit in this thing we call a liberal democracy. The choice is actually theirs. They can get over themselves and their self-importance or they can make themselves at home in their Republican box.

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

» Maybe we need an exorcism? Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: Maybe we need an exorcism? Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: Maybe we need an exorcism? Posted by: ericvonfleet
» RE: So, I'm a prejudiced bigot am I? Posted by: ericvonfleet
» RE: So, I'm a prejudiced bigot am I? Posted by: ericvonfleet
A simplex solution...
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Feb 11, 2006 11:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Instead of crafting a message that more folks will find inclusive to vote for one party or the other, why don’t we just spend a little more time informing the people (us) about the people behind the message (them). But wait, that’s why free press began as such a noble thing to be protected. Now I must expose the press (them) for the kind of people they are, and the reporters that work for them (formerly us). Since some formerly us have changed sides to them, we now have to find new avenues of information that will reveal the true nature of them. Problematic, now, as a bizzillion blogs yell down from us and them upon them and us. How then do we find what is indeed fact when them have so carefully crafted it as fact for approval by us?

I propose a solution for us, against them in this endeavor; each and every voter must pass a written exam of background on their chosen candidate, to verify that they (them) are indeed who they (them) say they are, and that they (them) are properly aligned with them for who (whom?) they vote. If they (them) should fail this background assessment, their (them) votes will automatically be recast for us (we, the people).

I (we) as voters should know enough about our candidate to know that any messages crafted to appeal to our (us) sensibilities are either; A. crafted, and quite light in substance by way of proof for acceptance into the realm of us (we), or B. True as evidenced by them before entering into the realm of we (us). Any statistical anomalies should indicate that whomever (they, the people that don’t want what we (us) want), should remain with them, until such time as proven worthy of acceptance into the realm of us (we, the people, wanting what we want).

I know it is very complex (simple?) to pick a candidate based on what we want based on a message. I’m just trying to find a way around yet another layer of obscurity that surrounds the fog created by the foggiest, and wrapped in yet another message, while boxed in an uncooperative press, shrouded in ether, and draped in blog.

My message is simple. Look before you (us) vote. Quit over thinking it; that’s a job for them (them, simply).

Now, burn this message before someone takes it out of context.

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

» RE: A simplex solution... Posted by: picket
» RE: A simplex solution... Posted by: outsidea
» Burn, baby, burn Posted by: Sojourner
» RE: Burn, baby, burn Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: A simplex solution... Posted by: Lincoln fan
We're gathering info on all US candidates at Progressive Independent
Posted by: katinmn on Feb 12, 2006 7:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you're looking ONLY for Dem candidates you won't be interested because we are also adding Greens, Independents and Socialists when there is no progressive (anti-war, election fraud-stopping, pro-universal health care) fighting Dem.

Check it out:
www.progressiveindependent.com, then go to the Candidates and Races forum.

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

It's not just swing voters' religion we need to stop belittling
Posted by: janvdb on Feb 12, 2006 11:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not just religion that triggers the elitist left's sneer response against more than half the population -- there is an entire menu of "taste"-related class markers which will trip that trigger just as quickly as black skin trips the racist trigger of your average KKK member.

Try these on for size:

* a "cracker" who is proud of and maybe still lives in his place of birth, if it is a podunk town, or some rural or Midwestern place.

* a person who "don't talk right," uses "ain't" occasionally and says things like "weird as a three-dollar bill," or "steep as a cow's face."

* a "knucklehead" tradesman speaking in a Boston or New Jersy accent

* a guy with a big gut who avers to enjoying his job driving a big rig cross country while listening to country music and yakking on his CB radio

* any woman who consorts with any of the types of men outlined above

Yep, we are talking congenital class markers just as immutable as skin color which evoke the same kind of discriminatory, negative, bigotted reaction from so many of our "eductated elite" that dark skin, big lips and kinky hair evoke from your average racist.

However, the one big difference is that it is still considered "OK" to express these gross class bigotries among so-called "enlightened" leftists today.

Bigotry is bigotry. And the discriminated-against are very very well aware of how they are viewed, how they are treated and who is guilty of this bigotry. And, they DON'T VOTE FOR THEM.

Class bigotry is the biggest reason the Dems are the out-party today.

There is a small group -- 18% of adults in the US have a 4-year degree -- of educated leftists in this country who can't seem to figure out that as long as they belittle those different from them, the belittled will not vote for their candidates and these educated elitists bigots will remain a powerless minority.

I don't care how damn smart, enlightened, correct or wonderful you are, if you are 18% of the population and you disrespect, anger, irritate, denigrate, laugh at and otherwise alienate the rest of the population, you aren't going to win any popularity contests.

Democracy IS a popularity contest.

So, in a democracy, you will be left powerless.

This is where the Dems are today.

Educated elitist cultural- and taste- bigots need to come to grips with their sicknesses just as white southerners needed to, in order to regain their place in our society.

Jan VanDenBerg

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

Conversing with the GOP
Posted by: robchapman on Feb 12, 2006 12:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am Republican because I have never seen a single Democratic candidate I would be willing to vote for.
I took this line from the first reaction to this article.
My question is why should the Democrats bother to talk to the Republicans? Why would we expect people who dismiss us so entirely and completely to ever help us or even try to deal with us?
The Democratic world view is simply better than the Republican world view. As Democrats we recognize that by making society bigger and including more points of view and by accomodating more elements and by getting more people to buy into the American Dream we ALL GET STRONGER.
The Republican world view, which the writer clearly demonstrates is that there is one right way to do things and the Republicans have it and they are going to force down our throats. They then denounce our intransigence to their acceptance of their dictatorial demands as proof of our mule headedness.
Again why do we bother talking with them?
We should be working in the cities, the densely populated near in suburbs and the aging villages that dot the countryside with their increasing decrepitude caused by GOP neglect.
The majority are waiting for LEADERSHIP. Dialogue with the Republicans is a submission to their corrupt and bankrupt leadership.
The GOP has feasted in the past three decades on the defection of conservative dems. The conservative dems are swing voters at best. They are defecting to the GOP for a reason, much of it stemming from sheer animus. We can and must re-build the Party without them.
The Democrats may decide to go with a theocratically oriented values-platform. I will oppose it. Humanity is worthwhile even without God. We are not denying God when we offer to serve our brother. As the Republican Party and the Christian Right are proving we shall DENY OUR HUMANITY when we force politics to serve religion.

Democrats need to strenghten their committment to finding shared human based values and to using them to serve our communites and not to feed the molochs of our religious orthodoxies.

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York

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

gregor
Posted by: Gregor on Feb 12, 2006 12:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Lerner did a good analysis of our social and spiritual morass in this country. There is a huge disconnect between the people and their ruling government right now. When you live with privilage and power, your decisions are based on those structures. The generation voted into office has always sought those structures. The people I know who voted Republican didn't do it out of religious decisions, but because they didn't feel the Dems had any good answer to the financial problems this country faced...And also, they got a big tax kickback, so they voted for "the team". It is difficult to raise people's sense of moral duty when their pocket books are affected. Our government has done a good job of dumbifying the education in this country, of lowering people's salary and creating an environment that puts people in debt so they are controlled like serfs.The vast majority of Americans, however, are not rich, nor receiving big tax kickbacks. They have the power, really, to change things, but they are easily duped since they don't have the time or energy to devote to magnanimous causes. What happens in those cases is that things get really bad, and then the public does rise up to reassert their rights...It is the flow of human history. Right now in this country there are a lot of protest groups marching...But you won't hear about them on Corporate News. The Networks all support the Bush Administration...You have to know, you are not alone. The power rests in the people. When you or your loved ones are hauled off to secret prisons for their opinions, then maybe you will see the need to fight. Talk is cheap. Take action!

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

» RE: gregor-"Hauled off to Prison?" Posted by: drricklippin
Lots of good things here...but
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Feb 12, 2006 10:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bottom line for me is this: Politics in America has got be amoral, not immoral, for this great nation to survive.

Morality and values should be built into my candidates from the ground up; from when they were born, christened, baptized, or otherwise anointed by their spiritual guides BEFORE they ever show up for service. My society should be dictating that direction, which it seemed to do well before another, more powerful and corrupting God came on the scene. We all know who that God is, and it seems to be the most corrupting, influential God of all.

We established our country around many versions of God and planned accordingly. We did not plan well for one other, but will do so very soon, perhaps by bombing K street.

For if we continue to believe that our government cannot be amoral without being immoral as well, Washington DC will look like Baghdad, as we settle into a few thousand years of fighting over the correct interpretations of religious texts and meanings forever more.

Right now there are arguably three hundred million versions and interpretations of God. How in hell will I ever reach consensus while throwing down in that regression?

Further yet, where will we put the Catholics, and the Baptists to keep them from killing the Jews? Where will we place Pat Robertson, to keep him from killing everyone?

As an aging democrat, I expect my candidate to be amoral, because if that person is not, then he doesn’t represent my party. I not voting for a god, I’m voting for a guide.

For those on the right that want to sling some shit here, knock yourself out. For those of you that just want a little morality in your politics, that’s ok too, just don’t waste our time passing laws to protect the sanctity of marriage, or crap that serves no other purpose but to prove how moral you are, are that your fucking values have merit because you can read a few verses of English text translated from a language that had no word for marriage. That’s your value and badge, not mine. This is my opinion, not yours.

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

Faith in reason
Posted by: stormchilde1975 on Feb 13, 2006 9:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact is reason is only so good, morally speaking. There are plenty of reasonable cases for invading Iraq. I wish the Bush Administration had the balls to make one, like: "The world economy in the next fifty years will pivot on control of oil resources. It is critical that America not be left in the lurch while less civilized nations subvert that control. Therefore we are invading Iraq."
Who says the American people wouldn't have gotten behind that? I'm cynical enough to say that we might have.
But my faith keeps me from finding that case (or any other, no matter HOW reasonable or logical) acceptable. Murdering others is simply wrong. My faith teaches me that human beings as souls have a value that outweighs material concerns. Given that premise, how could anyone use my faith to convince me to kill people?

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

YES! I'm pre 9/11
Posted by: Edward George on Feb 13, 2006 2:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The murder of 3,000 Americans by a bunch of fanatics was a tragedy, but that was two New York sky scrapers that collapsed. It was not the United States of America defined by the Constitution. I am still the same person and I still live in and love the same nation. Any American citizen who advocates anything else is a traitor.

Our stand, our creed and our agenda is not confused or eratic. It is simple and it is complete. STOP! Stop this insanity so that we can return to the Constitution and to common sense. Stop pretending that our country is suddenly immune to distrust from the rest of the world. Stop pretending that this country is immune to the common sense of economics, immune to the reality of debt. Stop claiming that borrowed money is "income" as though from services rendered or the sale of goods. Stop pretending that this country and no other can indefinitely claim the right to invade without cause. Stop pontificating and pretending to solve problems while they grow ever worse. Just STOP! Then we will be able to return to the common sense working out of solutions to complex problems, the common sense that is being choked by slick obfuscation. We don't need anything new, the Constitution will still work just fine if we let it.

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

Ditch the message...
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Feb 14, 2006 6:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that the republican party has succeeded to a great extent in turning us on ourselves.

They have convinced us that democracy does not work, that big government is somehow different than big business, that you can have morals and values without ever even calling them into question.

By mocking elitism, one of the currents I see here, and aptly demonstrated by Jan VanDenBerg at the bottom of this thread, we are cutting our own throats.

Rush and Ann have become heroes of the everyman and woman by acting dumb, and by thumbing their noses at the things at the things we hold near and dear; we have allowed them to, as a society, force us to drop our own elite values and accept everything that left does as more moronic than elitist. My society must have an elite that accurately represents the morass of the masses; for if it does not, we will return to a feudal system whereas our only tools to achieve redress of grievances are a pitchfork, and a handful of rocks.

We must raise ourselves up, not dumb ourselves down. We must try to understand to a greater degree why we want joe six pack to run our country, while we wouldn’t trust him to watch our children.

The good news is that there really aren’t that many in this country that truly exhibit this dichotomy. Look no further than the numbers that voted over the last three elections and take heart in the fact that if we just get a little more participation from joe six pack, a little more understanding, and a little less bullshit, we can get our democracy back on track.

Democracy aint broken, it is it’s participants that are broken; fractured by a contingent that played a broken record of a message on us. This group framed us so well that a small group swung the gate in its favor. More of us have to stand up now and call these bastards out.

We all want the same things we always have. Why are we vilified daily to the extent that we refuse to participate or advocate throwing them all out?

Because the truth got lost in the message. Throw the message out. Regain truth and accountability by demanding it over and over again. Beat Karl Rove over the head with it until his bloody shirt is the one we wave. Get off you ass and figure out why Kerry didn’t suck so bad after all. Dig your heals in and demand more and keep doing it until our elite get it, or you become so yourself; with a higher understanding that if we continue to make the democrats frame a message that appeals to us all, that they will collapse in despair because we were just too fucking dumb to get it.

Quit being framed.

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

A Real Shame
Posted by: dlf on Feb 14, 2006 7:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is that with the internet available to the Democratic Party, they have seen only the positive effect of raising money and awareness through its use. If they were maximizing the internet they would be listening, forming strategy based on consensus, and tackling issues that resonate on these boards. Democrats keep talking about coalition building you can't do that without consensus. I was raised in a Democratic household that continues to vote for the party, though the party long abandoned any agenda that speaks to the Black diaspora. I would vote for road-kill before I vote along party lines simply because my family does. The Democrats found a way to harness the power of this medium to revolutionize fundraising, I suggest they find a way to use it to make people like myself believe they get it. Because right now, I don't think they have a clue. After reading that Paul Hackett has abandoned his pursuit of political office under party pressure, I know the party doesn't get it, and it's gonna be a long time between drinks.

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

» RE: A Real Shame Posted by: kelly.nickell
re: class issues
Posted by: libmom on Feb 14, 2006 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just wanted to add that in addition to the above-mentioned stereotypes (and people who will rarely vote in their self-interest)...the disdain from some is also about region, in addition to class. It infuriates me (and happens at least once a month) when some Lefty that I agree with most of the time, comes out with some comment about inbreeding in the South, or some other nasty reference to the people in the South. I come from the Appalachian region and am disgusted by how it continues to be ok to disparage hillbillies and the like. It is completely unhelpful--for elections and for changing people's thinking patterns. Ninety-eight percent of my family members are conservative Christians, but they aren't stupid and they aren't evil.

How badly do you want to spread your message? Speak in plain language...do not dismiss religious people, Southern people, Mid-Western people, working people, "uneducated" people, etc. Give the same respect you demand. Democrats deserve to lose elections if they cannot communicate with the red state people--and I don't mean "cater" to them--recruit more people from these areas to influence the party, the strategy and candidates.

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

» RE: re: class issues Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: re: class issues Posted by: libmom
» RE: re: class issues Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: re: class issues Posted by: libmom
Justice of another kind...
Posted by: prime63 on Feb 14, 2006 11:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://origin63.blogspot.com/

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

http://origin63.blogspot.com/
Posted by: prime63 on Feb 14, 2006 11:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A different blog... http://origin63.blogspot.com/

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

greentime
Posted by: greentime on Feb 15, 2006 6:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Simply put, the Democrats don't care any more about the people than the republicans do and we know for certain that they don't care. It is time turn away from all that and toward creating many new coalitions. We don't have to be winners, or "No.1" with our big foam fingers flyng. That is an old way of thinking. Consumerism is not a culture. We must be citizens anew.

Moving forward in all the ways we know will make the changes we want. We already have the collective wisdom. Cultures are created by serving not by shopping. The need is there, the numbers are with us and the momentum will be huge. The tiny runaway minority that intends to bully us and rule the world can be easily limited just by our turning away from them and towards ourselves. They are done, and the troubled earth that so very much needs our care is calling for us to create a new culture based on real necessity. The time to start is right now.

If you want proof, turn your world map upside down and simply look at what it shows you. If we don't become a global participant by creating an example of a democracy that is a sustainable positive culture, we will be sidelined. As the slogan says: "It's a planet, not and empire!"

Show Love!

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

Slang Time
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Feb 15, 2006 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think there may be a way to classify how each one of us feels about a message rather than wasting our time on the message.

I will present several labels here, you choose or make up your own to express how you feel without writing down your feelings about it.

Bush and Co.
Bush Co. LLP.
The Bush Organization Ltd.
The W. Bush Corporation.
The Bush Foundation.
The Bush Foundation, International
The W. Bush Organization.
BushForPrez.com
Bushforpresident.org
BushthePresident.gov
Skull and Bones for a New American Brotherhood.
The Bush Coalition Companies
WB SOTU Broadcasting
Perpetual Fear Video Gaming Co.
GW Tutorial Services Compananny
GWB Marketing Stratageries
W Corporation.
W and L Partners, LLP.
Bush Priority Management Company.
Bush & Co Glass and Mirror
Bush Brothers Masonry.
Bush Brothers Advertising.
Busch
Organizational Management Strategies LLP.
Government Management Strategeries Ltd.
Message Minders.
The GW Cloak Company, Inc.
Right Brain Strategeries
Crooks and Liars R Us
Holy Mother of W. Christian Church.
12 Step Strategery Co.
Dark Places Lighting Co.
Market Capital International Management Partners – Baghdad.
Do Say Do Square Dancing School.
Circular Components Technologies
Arbusto Herbicide Company – Sugarland
Flatlanders Landscaping LLP.
Global Coalition Foundations Ltd.
The Project for the Advancement of Genius International.
The DC Turkey Shoot Target Range.
Lefty Loosy Screwdriver Company
Locktight Data Management
ISDS – ssssh! (Information Services Document Shredding)
The Society for the Advancement of Secrecy.
The GWB-BS Megaphone Company

I could do this all day. You guys take a swing.

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

Join the Spirit on these sites! We can only win united!
Posted by: Mary Luketich on Feb 15, 2006 12:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Americans for Tax Reform - www.atr.org
Air America Radio - www.airamericaradio.com
Alliance for Natural Health - www.alliance-natural-health.org
American Public Health Association - www.apha.org
Americans for the Arts - www.americansforthearts.org
Campaign for America's Wilderness - www.leaveitwild.org
Congress.org - www.eactivist.org
Doctor Yourself.com - www.doctoryourself.com
EcoEarth.info - www.ecoearth.info
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting - www.fair.org
Feminist Majority - feminist.org
Coalition for Health Freedom - www.coalitionforhealthfreedom.org
American Institute for Preventitive Medicine - www.healthylife.com
In These Times - www.inthesetimes.com
American Council for Voluntary Internation Action - www.interaction.org
Long Term Care Community Coalition - www.ltccc.org
National Association of Service and Conservation Corps (NASCC) - www.nascc.org
National Low Income Housing Coalition - www.nlihc.org
National Organization for Women - www.now.org
New American Dream - www.newdream.org
Parents Television Council - www.parentstv.org
The Power to End Hunger - www.results.org
Grassroots Political Campaign - www.thecampaign.org
The Liberty Committee - www.thelibertycommittee.org
Trust for America's Health - healthyamericans.org
TVNews Lies - www.tvnewslies.org
Women Employed Action Network www.womenemployed.org
Youth Policy Action Center - www.youthpolicyactioncenter.org
YouthBuild USA - www.youthbuild.org
Campus Activism - www.campusactivism.org
Integrative Activism - www.integrativeactivism.net
Transitioners - transitioners.org
Positive Futures Network - www.yesmagazine.org

These are just a few of the communities online that support the Spirit that will change the world. And if you're not helping, YOU'RE NOT HELPING!

So, Signup today and stop criticizing and start helping to change the world into what it SHOULD be!

Mary Luketich
Wife, Mother and Activist

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

Religion vs Spirituality vs Pocketbook
Posted by: thinkingsooner on Feb 15, 2006 11:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What Lerner is espousing is a "vision" for the Dems. Nothing more and nothing less. We can't and won't win until we stop saying, "Yeah, what he said". -- The Dems have to draw a picture of their world. Unfortunately, most Dems do NOT agree with most Lefities on that picture. -- But what Dems can win on is the fiscal well-being of the working poor. The tide is running high on that issue and getting higher as the hurricant season approaches. Of course, our distinguished national debt may cause "A Perfect Storm" anyway and we in the US end up where we were in the '30's. But that's just me thinking this. Then there is "Peak Oil" staring us in the face too. -- Dems could turn that one into a winner too. ---------- It's all a matter of timing and someday real soon religiousity and/or spirituality will fall by the wayside when you can't afford to buy the gas to take your kid to the free-clinic that closed for lack of funding two months ago.

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

Yurple
Posted by: yurple on Feb 16, 2006 9:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Lerner provides a lot of wisdom. It is absolutely true that liberals must reclaim a commitment to moral and spiritual values. However, while for some of us those values come in a religious package, for others, they don't. I think we need to be extremely cognizant of not taking "religion" into the public square or foisting particular religious views on others. What we do need to do, however, is to truly identify and articulate the underlying values and how they separate us from the right.

I've noticed that often, when Democrats are asked what they stand for, they list a bunch of POLICIES (universal healthcare, etc.). But we need to articulate what lies beneath those policies -- WHY we would be for them. Here are a few thoughts:

1. We believe in taking care of one another, in providing for those in need, for reaching out our hearts to those that struggle, in human compassion. We want our government to play a large role in institutionalizing those values. (We can't be reluctant to say that.)
2. We believe that we need to reach beyond ourselves and our own, immediate comfort levels. There are important things beyond that which affect us individually. We want to reach out to meet the needs of others, even if those needs are ones we don't ourselves have. We want to do things to create a peaceful, environmentally friendly world -- even if we'll be long gone by the time the fruits of those efforts become obvious. We can think generations ahead. There's something bigger than us and our egoistic selves.
3. The free market concept has a lot to offer a society. But it's not everything. There will always be people who fall behind in it, by definition. We don't want to leave those people on their own. There are things that a free market cannot address. We are obliged to address them in other ways.
4. Following up on the idea that we don't believe that a free market philosophy applies in all areas of life because it can't address all of our spiritual, heart-centered, and security needs, we don't believe in leaving the most vulnerable to fend for themselves. For instance, sick people should not be forced to comparison shop for health care like it's a pair of shoes. Financially secure people are not more entitled to better health care than those who struggle economically. Some things should not be limited by the capitalist model.
5. "Pick yourself up by your bootstraps" might be a romanticized American ethos and it certainly has its place, but it's not everything. There are times where compassion, love, a helping hand, and generosity are what's called for.
6. Feeling secure is a spiritual and psychological need we all have, and we must do all we can to promote that. At the same time, uncertainty, unpredictability, and vulnerability are realities of life, and we need to reach a heartfelt acceptance of that truth rather than falling for false placating assurances. Having said that, we need to make ourselves as safe as humanly possible, and this Administration has failed miserably at that. Just check out the 9-11 "report card."

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

» RE: Yurple Posted by: mikespindell
I agree: Lerner's ideas are right up there with Lakoff's
Posted by: zeitgeist1979 on Feb 19, 2006 4:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I was reading this AlterNet article I thought to myself "finally somebody that is able to see into human nature itself and realize that human by nature have a biological need for transcendence." I thought Lerner was right on the money: the Republicans have tapped into a basic need of the American people that runs deeper than mere superficial economic ones. He is also SO right about how Democrats need to look for building a long-term influence in shaping the overall culture of this country and stop concentrating only on fleeting messages of economic matters. As a person schooled in Anthropology, I couldn't agree more with him because he recognizes what social scientists have been aware of all along: the basic need of humans for transcendence and for a community that helps them pursue this very same thing, which in many cases takes the form of following a religion. I really hope Lerner's ideas catch on and influence the way in which Democrats communicate with the public. Although I think Lerner here trivializes the role of individuals like Jon Stewart or Bill Maher who sometimes ridicule the religious right. I think what they do is genius because it melds raising political awareness (something that can be quite dull) with humor (something that can be very powerful). I think that we should have more of Jon Stewart-ian and Bill Maher-ian way of talking about the right BUT in addition to that (and not having it be replaced by) we should ALSO have the kind of speech that Lerner here discusses.

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

the conundrum continues
Posted by: DaBear on Feb 21, 2006 9:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
R. Lerner is spot-on with regard to the "meaning needs" and "New Bottom Line" stuff (spinoffs of Spirit Matters, with which I wholeheartedly agree).

But there is this Boomeresque quality to all his arguments' conclusions that just snuffs any inspiration... it's that whole stupid, stupid "work on the Democrats" mantra. OMG, if I hear one more Boomer talking about how the Dems will save us if we can only save the Dems, this Gen-Xer is gonna puke. The trouble is the impact of that is far worse the hurling... people are being killed across the planet because of this idiotic allegiance to the god-damned Democrats and their brokedown palace!

The only thing I can do is shake my head and, once again, walk away because the conundrum is still, even after Left Hand, unchanged. The brilliance and inspiration of Left Hand is short circuited by it's blind faith in the very corruption that brought us to this point in history to somehow bring us out of it and I just don't see that as being very smart or very hopeful.

Has no one ever heard Einstein (loosely paraphrased) say that you can't fix a problem with the same stupid thinkin' that created it in the first place? Drop the Dems already. Hell even the Greens are moot (just look at their religaphobia... try to be a religious or even a spiritual Jew in the Greens... you'll be out on your ass in a heartbeat, unless your agnostic, or aetheist and definitely anti-zionist, yada, yada, yada). Until we utterly dump the extant corrupt and highly useless electoral process and fix the broken pipes, NOTHING will change, people! Now new bottom lines are going to pan out until we get a new means of electing meaningful representation (admittedly this invokes yet more bottom line stuff...because you cannot merely replace corrupt voting with more voting if the notions of representation aren't fixed first).

Ugh, this is so infuriating and so frustrating.

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