Wednesday November 03, 2004 at 3:11 PM
Disappointed but not defeated
Appearing in Politics
I wish I had more encouraging words of my own, but since I don’t, I’m going to quote at length from David Orr writing in Grist Magazine. Check out the full catalog of environmental activists writing about what comes next.
For myself, I’d say this: don’t allow your disappointment to give way to dispair.
The arc of history is long. And while this election has shown us the ugly, intolerant, and blind underbelly of American society, it has also shown that the causes of justice, truth, and activism are alive, well, and still quite capable of putting up one hell of a fight.
…
David Orr writing in Grist Magazine’s Main Dish:
First, let’s get the name of the thing right. The election of 2004 confirms James Madison’s worst nightmare: the takeover of all branches of the federal government not just by a single party, but by an extreme faction of that party.
Second, let’s be clear about where we are headed. We the people are about to get more corruption, more division, more lies, more terrorism, more pollution, more breaks for the wealthy, more religious fanaticism, more corporate subsidies, more kids left behind, more struggling families, more debt piled on the backs of our children, more urban neglect, more nutty ideology, and further procrastination on the issue of potentially catastrophic climate change looming just ahead.
Third, the long-term objectives are clear: restore democracy to the United States by eliminating money from politics, reassert public control of the airwaves, restore a free, locally owned press, repair the frayed separation between church and state, and educate the people once again to be discerning citizens. How can we do such things? The same way all great and noble things are accomplished — with patience, courage, energy, certainty, and a mastery of the art of strategy. The soft underbelly of the Bush-Cheney-Rove empire includes all thoughtful conservatives disturbed by recklessness; all honest persons offended by mendacity; and all true Christians sufficiently alert to notice the discrepancy between the words and life of the “Prince of Peace” and our foreign and domestic policies.
And we have no energy for despair!
:: David Orr is chair of the environmental studies program at Oberlin College and author of The Last Refuge, The Nature of Design, and Earth in Mind.
Comments
I think it's good news that California went strongly for Kerry. And our local counties did extremely well -- Santa Clara = 64% Kerry, San Mateo = 70% Kerry, SF = 84% Kerry.
But check this story from Grist for more alarming news:
"Christian politics has as its primary intent the conquest of the land -- of men, families, institutions, bureaucracies, courts, and governments for the Kingdom of Christ," writes reconstructionist George Grant. Christian dominion will be achieved by ending the separation of church and state, replacing U.S. democracy with a theocracy ruled by Old Testament law, and cutting all government social programs, instead turning that work over to Christian churches.
Sound familiar? Sound like anyone we know? In fact, over 100 US Representatives and more than 40 Senators seem to be supporting this or something like it. More at: http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2004/10/27/scherer-christian/
Posted by: Nils on Wed Nov 03, 04
I am left to wonder as to why religious extremism has taken root in the richest and poorest countries in the world.
What is it about America that has left her uniquely vulnerable among industrialized nations? Why are we, the most scientifically advanced society in history, tending towards the Dark Ages? Why are we abandoning reason in favor of faith?
And why have we become so quick to ignore the undeniable realities of the present while holding on to some farsical fantasy of the future constructed from a faith-based vision where all is golden and our nation is single-handedly rescued by "God"?
Why is it suddenly so difficult for Americans to think, question, and consider?
Posted by: Bob Baxley on Wed Nov 03, 04
Suddenly? Bob, 1968 was just 35 years ago. We were hanging black people from trees less than 60 years ago. Women were burning bras not just 30 years ago.
I think its easy to forget how far we *haven't* come given our advancements elsewhere. The fact is, the human race is still primitive, and we know little. Europe isn't that much better than us considering they allowed Hitler and Stalin to rise to power within the past century. Japan? They viciously attacked us at Pearl Harbor in that same time period.
The question for me isn't why religious extremism is finally rearing its ugly head. The question for me is when are the smart people going to get really pissed off and really fight back, like the Framers did when they decided it was time to create a republic and end the reign of kings.
Posted by: Andrei Herasimchuk on Wed Nov 03, 04
Andrei...You forgot to mention the internment of Japanese-Americans, the fire bombing of Japan and Europe, and the genocide of Native Americans.
Regardless of America's rather dubious moral history in world affairs however, I stand by my basic thought which is this: America stands as the only modern industrialized nation to be tilting towards theocracy. The other cases you mentioned are good examples of industrialized nations willing marching towards radicalism, but none of them were towards religious radicalism.
As for the Framers and their decision to start a republic, I'd point you to "The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution". The history of our nation's founding is considerably more complex than your comment suggests.
And finally, as for the "smart" people fighting back, I'm not sure we really know how. The tools of intelligence -- individual inquiry, independent thought, open-minded analysis -- are poorly suited to battle the forces of intolerance and religious extremism. Simply put, you can't argue with a zealot.
[ ] Link to Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0674443020/qid=1099539826/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-8630770-3678366?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Posted by: Bob Baxley on Wed Nov 03, 04
I brought up those examples not as a way to hold some sort of immorality contest, just to point out that the idea this wave of ignorance "suddenly" appeared seems a little off, as you questioend in your first comment.
As arguing with a zealot... well, for the most part, I agree. However, in this case, the religious zealots have been given a good hood-winking from greedy corporate power-mongers. So I think in this case, the idea is try and figure out how to battle the guys pulling the strings, not the innocent lemmings who seem to believe the world is flat.
Posted by: Andrei Herasimchuk on Wed Nov 03, 04
Andrei,
I absolutely agree with your point of battling the puppet masters, rather than the puppets. But I think you're confusing "innocence" with ignorance. I just can't look at zealots as innocent.
Bob, you raise a good point. How DO we fight this slide toward theocracy? The progressive movement to get out the vote was the most passionate I've ever seen, yet we were still defeated by the fear-mongering and "morality" campaign. It's hard not to feel helpless, and surrounded by the enemy. If voting doesn't work, what kind of revolution are we left with?
Posted by: Juli Ned on Wed Nov 03, 04
I won't quibble over differences between ignorance and innocence, as they both feel like close enough cousins to me as to not matter much in the end, imho.
Bob, have you seen this? http://www.knife-party.net/flash/barry.html
Food for thought.
Posted by: Andrei Herasimchuk on Wed Nov 03, 04
Just wondering who you both think the "pupper masters" actually are. The connection between the religious right and the corporateers seems to me to be more a marriage of convenience than one of shared values. And if anyone holds the power in the relationship, it's the fundamentalists rather than the corporate elite.
Posted by: Bob Baxley on Wed Nov 03, 04
Oh, the fundamentalist organizations are definitely the ones holding the strings. The religious right were on Bush's back about the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage long before he presented it to Congress. Evangelical Christians form a huge, sheeplike voting base, so Bush naturally targeted them by promising a faith-based agenda in return for their support. Organizations like Focus on the Family and the Southern Baptist Convention are in touch with Karl Rove in weekly conference calls. Bush may be an idiot, but his advisors know what they're doing. The sad thing is that most of the Christian voters who put Bush back into office think they are voting for a "moral" man who shares their values, but both the Bush administration and their Evangelical puppetmasters have a vested interest in never letting their voting base find out the ugly truth.
The big question I have now is whether or not 2008 will be the break that a third party has been seeking for decades. With the Democratic party reexamining themselves, and trying to figure out a way to incorporate "faith" into their platform, progressives may be left with no major party to represent them and their interests. I'm afraid that the Democrats will try to pander to the religious right, at the risk of alienating most of their core supporters. If that happens, the Libertarian Party or Green Party might actually make a dent in 2008. Any thoughts?
Posted by: Juli Ned on Wed Nov 03, 04