Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Where liberals go to feel good about themselves.

Posted 2 years ago on April 11, 2012, 4:03 a.m. EST by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

by Chris Hedges

Barack Obama is another stock character in the cyclical political theater embraced by the liberal class. Act I is the burst of enthusiasm for a Democratic candidate who, through clever branding and public relations, appears finally to stand up for the interests of citizens rather than corporations. Act II is the flurry of euphoria and excitement. Act III begins with befuddled confusion and gnawing disappointment, humiliating appeals to the elected official to correct "mistakes," and pleading with the officeholder to return to his or her true self. Act IV is the thunder and lightning scene. Liberals strut across the stage in faux moral outrage, delivering empty threats of vengeance. And then there is Act V. This act is the most pathetic. It is as much farce as tragedy. Liberals-frightened back into submission by the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party or the call to be practical-begin the drama all over again.

We are now in Act IV, the one where the liberal class postures like the cowardly policemen in "The Pirates of Penzance." Liberals promise battle. They talk of glory and honor. They vow not to abandon their core liberal values. They rouse themselves, like the terrified policemen who have no intention of fighting the pirates, with the bugle call of "Tarantara!" This scene is the most painful to watch. It is a window into how hollow, vacuous and powerless liberals and liberal institutions including labor, the liberal church, the press, the arts, universities and the Democratic Party have become. They fight for nothing. They stand for nothing. And at a moment when we desperately need citizens and institutions willing to stand up against corporate forces for the core liberal values, values that make a democracy possible, we get the ridiculous chatter and noise of the liberal class.

The moral outrage of the liberal class, a specialty of MSNBC, groups such as Progressives for Obama and MoveOn.org, is built around the absurd language of personal narrative-as if Barack Obama ever wanted to or could defy the interests of Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase or General Electric. The liberal class refuses to directly confront the dead hand of corporate power that is rapidly transforming America into a brutal feudal state. To name this power, to admit that it has a death grip on our political process, our systems of information, our artistic and religious expression, our education, and has successfully emasculated popular movements, including labor, is to admit that the only weapons we have left are acts of civil disobedience. And civil disobedience is difficult, uncomfortable and lonely. It requires us to step outside the formal systems of power and trust in acts that are marginal, often unrecognized and have no hope of immediate success.

The liberal class' solution to the bleak political landscape is the conference. This, along with letters and cries of outrage circulated on the Internet, is its preferred form of expression. Conferences, whether organized by Left Forum, Rabbi Michael Lerner's Tikkun or figures such as Ted Glick-who is touting a plan to lure progressives, including members of the Democratic Party, into something he calls a "third force"-are where liberals go to feel good about themselves again. These conferences are not fundamentally about change. They are designed to elevate self-appointed liberal apologists who seek to become advisers and courtiers within the Democratic Party. The conferences produce resolutions no one reads. They build networks no one uses. But with each conference liberals get to do what they do best-applaud their own moral probity. They make passionate appeals to work within systems, such as electoral politics, that have been gamed by the corporate state. And the result is to spur well-meaning people toward useless and ultimately self-defeating activity.

"What we need is an alliance which consciously incorporates elected Democrats as well as elected Greens and independents, as well as groups, or individual leaders and members of groups, like Progressive Democrats of America and the Green Party," Glick proposes. "More than that, this alliance eventually needs to support and work to elect candidates running both as Democrats and progressive independents, and maybe even an occasional Republican."

The Tikkun Conference held in Washington last June was another pathetic display of liberal apologists begging Obama to be Obama. The organizers called on those participating to "Support Obama to BE the Obama We Voted For-Not the Inside-the-Beltway Pragmatist/Realist whose compromises have led to a decrease in his popularity and opened the door for a revival of the just-recently-discredited Right wing."

Good luck.

The organizers of the Left Forum conference scheduled for this March at Pace University in New York City also communicate in the amorphous, high-blown moral rhetoric that is unmoored from the actual and real. The upcoming Left Forum conference, which has the vacuous title "Towards a Politics of Solidarity," promises to "focus on the age-old theme of solidarity: the moral act of imagination underpinning working-class victories everywhere. It will undertake to examine the new forms of far-reaching solidarity that are both necessary and possible in an increasingly global world." The organizers posit that "the potential for transformative struggles in the 21st century depends on new chains of solidarity-between workers in the rich world and workers in the global south, indigenous peasants and more affluent consumers, students and pensioners, villagers in the Niger Delta and environmental campaigners in the Gulf of Mexico, marchers and rioters in Greece and Spain, and unionists in the United States and China." The conference "will contribute to the intellectual underpinnings of new and tighter forms of world-wide solidarity upon which all successful emancipatory struggles of the future will depend."

The conference agenda, which sounds like a parody of a course catalogue description, includes the requisite academic jargon of "moral act of imagination" and "chains of solidarity." This language gives to the enterprise a lofty but undefined purpose. And this is a specialty of the liberal class-to grandly say nothing. The last thing the liberal class intends to do is fight back. Left Forum brings in a few titans, including Noam Chomsky, who is always worth hearing, but it contributes as well to the lethargy and turpitude that have made the liberal class impotent.

The only gatherings worth attending from now on are acts that organize civil disobedience, which is why I will be at Lafayette Park in Washington, D.C., at noon March 19 to protest the eighth anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Veterans groups on March 19 will also carry out street protests in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago. You can link to the protests here. Save your bus fare and your energy for events like this one.

Either we begin to militantly stand against the coal, oil and natural gas industry or we do not. Either we defy pre-emptive war and occupation or we do not. Either we demand that the criminal class on Wall Street be held accountable for the theft of billions of dollars from small shareholders whose savings for retirement or college were wiped out or we do not. Either we defend basic civil liberties, including habeas corpus and the prosecution of torturers or we do not. Either we turn on liberal institutions, including the Democratic Party, which collaborate with these corporations or we do not. Either we accept that the age of political compromise is dead, that the corporate systems of power are instruments of death that can be fought only by physical acts of resistance or we do not. If the liberal class remains gullible and weak, if it continues to speak to itself and others in meaningless platitudes, it will remain as responsible for our enslavement as those it pompously denounces.

3 Comments

3 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 0 points by bensdog (-2) 2 years ago

What's your beef with Obama?...he's delivered on all his promises and the economy is starting to really kick ass. Obama is right on track to get this country transformed into a fair and equal society where we all share and care. Talking shit about our President is not cool. You're just full of hate and lies. If President Obama was white you wouldn't be bad mouthing him this way,that's a fact.

[-] 1 points by EricBlair (447) 2 years ago

You had me there for a second. I didn't realize your posts were satire until part way through this one.

It's funny, because I can actually imagine the Obamabots saying stuff like this.

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 2 years ago

Here's the thing; Obama's far from perfect, and even if he were the son of God Himself one man is by no means strong enough to reshape DC into something that we as a nation can be proud of. One man can't reshape an emaciated institution overgrown with corruption into a lean, clean system that works for everyone. One man can't even change the tone of political discourse around here for very long before things start to turn nasty again. Whether he would like to or not is irrelevant right now; those are things he can't do.

That said, there are a number of things that voting for Obama and the Democrats can and has accomplished, namely in terms of Supreme Court nominees. All you have to do is take a look at the split on the recent Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of strip-searches on suspicion of minor offenses such as traffic tickets; all of the justices tenured under Republican presidents had no problem with this while the others (including Obama's new appointees) were willing to go down in history as being against it.

Overall, Democrats are far from perfect, but I see them as more easily redeemable than their counterparts across the aisle. They have a hell of a time building and keeping a strongly unified coalition (it's the downside of being a "big tent" party; the same thing that OWS struggles with, only much less pronounced.) and many of them are still standard-make politicians (which generally indicates a baseline of venality and stupidity that we have yet to expunge from DC), which is regrettable. If the Republican Party was still the party of Olympia Snowe, then I'd probably be a good deal less emphatic in my support for the Democrats and be more willing to set a high bar for reelection no matter who you align with.

That said, the Republican Party is decidedly not the party of Olympia Snowe anymore; in fact it appears that they're a good chunk of the reason why she decided not to run again. The current crop of Republicans is moving farther and farther to the right, appealing to the worst of the current fringe groups at the expense of the rest of the nation, and there's no reason to believe that they're going to stop anytime soon. That is a serious problem, and it's one that will only be worsened by voting Republican.

As for voting for independents and just discarding both major parties in exchange for constituency-based candidates who can be held directly accountable, that would be great (and that's probably more along the lines of what the Founding Fathers wanted to see anyway) but it's not particularly practical. Each seat would be an enormous uphill battle (both parties will run candidates and those candidates will have far more money and support than an independent) and there's no guarantee that such candidates wouldn't get thoroughly trounced (which renders the whole idea moot in the short term due to the extreme difficulty in implementation).

Basically, in the short run our best bet is to get involved in the Democratic Party and try to turn it into the tool of the people. Don't just vote for the slate, get yourself a position on a precinct committee and play a role in picking the slate. If enough people like you or I do that, then we as a group will have almost as much control over who we want to represent us as we would with independents but our candidates will have the full backing of an enormous machine.