Showing posts with label Neoliberalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Neoliberalism. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Russian Conspiracies- a New Brand of McCarthyism?



Joseph McCarthy was a republican when he began his immoral and oppressive crackdown on left-wing thinkers in the US. What many seem not to know, however, is that McCarthy enjoyed support from the democrats as well. Before McCarthy even started, democratic president Harry Truman issued Executive Order 9835, which removed government employees deemed unloyal to the United States. Grounds for removal included:

             "Membership in, affiliation with or sympathetic association with any foreign or domestic organization, association, movement, group or combination of persons, designated by the Attorney General as totalitarian, fascist, communist, or subversive, or as having adopted a policy of advocating or approving the commission of acts of force or violence to deny other persons their rights under the Constitution of the United States, or as seeking to alter the form of government of the United States by unconstitutional means." [1]

The congressional committees tasked with exposing and charging communists were often headed or staffed with democrats. For instance, after McCarthy stepped down from the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations democrat John McClellan took over as chair, and Robert Kennedy was appointed as chief council [2]. Under McClellan the committee went after labor unions, leading to the Landrum-Griffith act, which barred communists from serving in leadership positions in unions [3].

I fear we are heading towards a similar situation. In my last post, I discussed the movement towards censorship, which is supported by both liberals and republicans. The EU resolution to counteract Russian propaganda was proposed by Anna Fotyga, a member of the right-wing Law and Justice party in Poland. But in the US the attack on Russian Media is widely led by the democrats, claiming that Russia was rigging the election through revealing the inner workings of the democratic party [4]. While Russian media is obviously not impartial, some liberals have begun condemning anyone who lends credibility to anything from Russian media sources.

Propornot, a group that refuses to reveal their identities or methods, has compiled a list of news organizations that are helping Russia's propaganda effort, intentionally or unknowingly. This list includes many alt-right websites largely devoid of evidence or sources, but it also includes many well-regarded, trustworthy left-wing publications, such as Truthdig and Naked Capitalism. They even list wikileaks, an organization which has done nothing but spread valid leaked documents [5]. This is far worse than just an irrelevant group of wackos condemning valid media, because now the Washington Post has run an article using this group's 'research' as a source [6]. This is fake news. This is propaganda.

If the liberals turn on the far left as they have throughout history, Trump-like leaders will continue to emerge. If we want to move forward, the fear-mongering has to stop, and liberals need to admit that neoliberal policies are how we got Trump. I don't mean to assign blame, as I think that's counterproductive. I do mean to push people to look at the causes of the fascist right's success, and to look at the rampant corruption and corporatism of their own party.

[1]: http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/executive-order-9835/
[2]: http://www.hsgac.senate.gov//imo/media/doc/psihistory.htm?attempt=2
[3]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1120618?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
[4]: http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/opinions/kremlin-trying-to-rig-election-nimmo-opinion/
[5]: http://www.propornot.com/p/the-list.html
[6]: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/washington-post-blacklist-story-is-shameful-disgusting-w452543

Friday, November 18, 2016

Solidarity Without Compromising Ideals

Image result for solidarity

Solidarity is important. If a political group is fractured they quickly lose power, and small factions have to often work with the larger group to accomplish their agenda. I think that applies especially after a loss. That being said, blindly rooting for a party is a compromise we can’t afford to make, and is actually counterproductive in the long run. To the democrats that protested Bush’s wars: did you protest Obama’s? After you fought courageously against Bush’s strengthening of the NSA, did you denounce Obama’s unprecedented crackdown on whistleblowers (more imprisoned under his administration than all previous presidencies combined) [1]? When you said the US shouldn’t act as the world’s police in Iraq, did you make the same claim about Syria? When you speak about GMOs and Monsanto do you mention that the Obama administration pushed biotech aggressively throughout the world [2]?

I ask these questions not to divide, but to challenge. The complacency in the democratic party has been frightening in the past eight years. We can had disagreements without dividing the left, and if we don't have and voice those disagreements, political power tends towards the corporations' side. I hope the one good thing to come from Trump’s administration is a reinvigoration of constructive anger and frustration, that will lead to meaningful change. However, please don’t let that die when the democrats are in power. The way you make your party better and stronger is the same way you make your country better and stronger; you challenge every ideology or policy you disagree with. When we let the democratic party drift further and further right, we lose votes and the moral high ground. Don't root for your party like a sports team, challenge your party to make it better.


I’m not claiming any moral purity or high ground when I challenge the apathy and rationalizing in the left. While I was aware and angry about the right-wing policies from the Obama administration, I didn’t do enough to combat those moves. I criticized these policies, but only spoke to a select few about them, and thus had no real effect. We all need to do better, the current state of affairs is evidence enough for that.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

Diagnosing Why Trump Won

There's no purpose in playing the blame game for who's vote or action resulted in Trump's victory. It's not constructive, and will only serve to increase a divide in the left that we cannot afford, especially right now. However, it is constructive to determine the underlying reasons for Trump's success, so we can address them for the sake of future elections.

Under democratic presidents (in addition to republican presidents), the income gap has either widened or closed a miniscule amount [1], the cost of living has skyrocketed [2], and minimum wage hasn't even kept even with inflation- in 1968 it was $10.86 in 2016 dollars [3]. In Clinton's administration NAFTA wreaked havoc on American jobs [4]. The democratic party has failed the working class. The only place they see to turn is to the neoconservatives. This is illogical, as neocons are no better for the working class than neoliberals. The neocons succeed because they use the anger of the white working class, and direct it towards those beneath them (other races, immigrants, etc.), instead of at those above them. To fix that the democrats need to become a populist party again. If they fail in that endeavor, Trump-like candidates will keep winning.

Becoming a populist party is certainly easier said than done, but it starts with the voters. If we elect primary candidates in local races that don't support neoliberalism, that will fight for their constituents, and that aren't sold out, that will send a message to the democratic elite: adapt, or get out of the way. We don't have the money to buy lobbyists or bribes, but we still have votes for now.

There is an alternative, with some upsides and downsides. Building a progressive party apart from the democrats involves more organizational work, but we wouldn't have to fight against party elites for control. Attempting both of these strategies means we don't put all our eggs in one basket, but also means we could be spread thin. What do you think?

Below are three excellent takes on Trump's win. If you only look at one of these links, I think Michael Moore absolutely nails the reason Trump won, far before the election, with eloquence and sincerity.

Michael Moore on Trump
Sanders on Trump
Glenn Greenwald on Trump

[1]: http://apps.urban.org/features/wealth-inequality-charts/
[2]: http://www.mybudget360.com/cost-of-living-compare-1975-2015-inflation-price-changes-history/ 
[3]: http://money.cnn.com/interactive/economy/minimum-wage-since-1938/
[4]: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lori-wallach/nafta-at-20-one-million-u_b_4550207.html