« Continuity | Main | Massacre »

Thursday, May 27, 2010

Comments

See the irony:

http://extremeliberal.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/give-me-symbolism-damn-it-the-new-drama-news-business/

I know, it sucks, but I doubt that she or anyone on the ships believes this. I think it's a position taken so as not to be seen as ignoring the president of the US (an obscenely powerful person/position), and definitely not wanting to criticize him, as other progressive voices do (and rightly so).

So, a protective stance. I hate it, but I see their point (at least I think I do). What's really important to me is that they're out there risking being blown out of the water by the psychpaths in the IDF.

Somewhat off topic comment: the titles of your posts are always hilarious. I enjoy reading the post then going back to the title and find the extra joke (it's like the prize in the crackerjack).

In some cases--maybe a great many cases, the link below might provide the right explanation.

link

Donald: Probably some (but definitely not the Free Gaza folks), though I thought StO and Michael Dawson's comments in that thread were closer to the mark than the actual posting.

Catherine: I think Wright was pretty clear when she said that "the audacity of hope" is what they want to see from the Obama administration--which implies that she and others believe it's a real possibility. Would they have named their boat after a book by George Bush under any circumstances? Or expressed hopes that Bush would have found the "courage to challenge the Israeli government on the siege of Gaza"?

But on the bright side, although many of them wanted to see a boat named after Obama's book it didn't happen--which means they were outvoted by enough other people who (one hopes) saw just how obscene it would have been. So maybe I should be looking at this glass as half full.

Donald, I was just about to post that link (and quote myself), so thanks!

This might make you all feel a smidgen better:

http://antonyloewenstein.com/2010/05/29/tell-israel-to-ditch-its-nuke-now/

Agreed about the free Gaza folks. I think it might apply to many Democrats though.

Catherine: I think Wright was pretty clear when she said that "the audacity of hope" is what they want to see from the Obama administration--which implies that she and others believe it's a real possibility. Would they have named their boat after a book by George Bush under any circumstances? Or expressed hopes that Bush would have found the "courage to challenge the Israeli government on the siege of Gaza"?

You're possibly right. But I do think that some of the flotillians have to (or believe they have to) make statements that don't completely cut the action off from those in power, and it seemed to me that Ann Wright was doing this. But perhaps not.

Dissent is carefully channeled into criticizing some aspect of the imperial state, rather than confronting and opposing it directly.

Criticizing the President -- or ineffectually appealing to his "better nature" -- whether Bush or Obama or anyone else, is to continually ignore the elephant in the room: the hundreds of corporations and billionaire beneficiaries of corporations, history's most powerful military-industrial complex, the Orwellian media Medusa, etc., all of whom directly benefit from and support the system of world hierarchical domination based upon neo-liberal epistemology.

This is a bunch of dogs yapping over the hood ornament while ignoring the car that will simply run them over and keep on moving.

Thus, such feckless "dissent" actually strengthens the system it claims to oppose by providing a veneer of dissent and the patina of open democracy to the juggernaut while never directly confronting the structures of actual power which the system is directly composed of.

All leftist groups and movements are easily infiltrated and the original intentions subverted; with all the money and media power in the world, it is child's play to the monster. Besides, the current world "economic crisis" means that 80% of the US is too busy worrying about putting bread on the table and a roof over their heads to even be aware of such theatrics or examine the dominant storyline for contradictions.

I'd largely agree, Malooga. The very reason I spend so much time chipping away at Obama is because his most critical function is to neutralize any deeper inquiry, dissent, or action. If I can make even one person think twice about their attachment to that hood ornament, I'd consider what I'm doing here worthwhile.

Donald: I think it might apply to many Democrats though.

Agreed, though in this posting I was specifically talking about progressives (a broken word at this point, but I mean people whose values and goals are generally aligned with my own). There are definitely large numbers of Democrats who just want imperialism with a smiley face, and Obama's the apotheosis of that--but I consider most of those people beyond reclamation and not worth the time to address. There will always be power worshipers in the world who feel there's some profound ideological gap between them and their counterparts on the other side, when it's actually little more than minor stylistic and procedural differences.

But what makes me despair is seeing those who know better--or should know better--putting their faith in and throwing their support behind someone who is, in reality, their worst enemy. The left's ongoing, self-defeating infatuation with champions of the status quo like Obama is one of the main reasons for its irrelevance in US politics.

The comments to this entry are closed.