At the end of Henrik Ibsen’s classic play, A Doll’s House,
Nora, the aggrieved wife, leaves her husband’s house and all the
illusions that sustained its marriage of lies. She chooses freedom over
fantasy. She will no longer be played with like a doll but will try to
become a free woman – a singular one. “There is another task I must
undertake first. I must try and educate myself,” she tells her husband
Torvald, a man completely incapable of understanding the social
programming that has made him society’s slave.
When Nora closes the doll’s house door behind her, the sound is like a
hammer blow of freedom. For anyone who has seen the play, even when
knowing the outcome in advance, that sound is profound. It keeps
echoing. It interrogates one’s conscience.
The echo asks: Do you live inside America’s doll house where a vast
tapestry of lies, bad faith, and cheap grace keep you caged in comfort,
as you repeat the habits that have been drilled into you?
In this doll’s house of propaganda into which America has been
converted, a great many of our basic assumptions are totally illusory.
Americans who voted for either Trump or Biden in the 2020 election
are like Torvald clones. They refuse to open that door so they might
close it behind them. They live in the doll’s house – all 146+ million
of them. Like Torvald, they are comforted. They are programmed and
propagandized, embracing the illusion that the electoral system is not
structured and controlled to make sure no significant change can occur,
no matter who is president. It is a sad reality promoted as democracy.
They will prattle on and give all sorts of reasons why they voted,
and for whom, and how if you don’t vote you have no right to bitch, and
how it’s this sacred right to vote that makes democracy great, blah blah
blah. It’s all sheer nonsense. For the U.S.A. is not a democracy; it is
an oligarchy run by the wealthy for the wealthy.
This is not a big secret. Everybody knows this is true; knows the
electoral system is sheer show business with the presidential
extravaganza drawing the big money from corporate lobbyists, investment
bankers, credit card companies, lawyers, business and hedge fund
executives, Silicon Valley honchos, think tanks, Wall Street gamblers,
millionaires, billionaires, et al. Biden and Trump spent over 3 billion dollars on the election. They are owned by the money people.
Ahead of the election, the US presidential candidates were vocal on
important foreign policy issues in the Middle East including Iran, Saudi
Arabia and Israel-Palestine, but debate was visibly absent on one
critical issue – Iraq.
Many observers believe the silence is because Iraq is a secondary
foreign policy issue for the US, that other Middle East affairs –
including the Iran nuclear deal and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict –
present more pressing concerns.
Are your sides
aching from laughter yet? Palestine? Neither of the duopoly candidates
even acknowledged Palestine. It was only third party candidates --
Gloria La Riva, for example -- who acknowledged the Palestinians.
As
for Iraq? What a bunch of crap. "Many observers believe"? Who, Arwa?
What idiot believes that? No one. No one inn your article with a name
offers that belief. No one believes that garbage.
Iraq
did come up throughout the primaries and into the general. For Joe it
was his ''mistake'' to vote for the Iraq War. And that mistake was
Bully Boy Bush.
Sing it, Joe, in your best Marvin Gaye, to Bully Boy Bush, "My mistake was to love you, girl, love you, girl."
Joe,
according to Joe, didn't get it wrong about the facts. Even though
Saddam Hussein did not have WMDs, Joe insists that he didn't get it
wrong. What he got wrong, what his mistake was, he insists was to trust
Bully Boy Bush.
That's actually a complete rewriting
of history but the press let him get away with that -- over and over.
They also let him brag about how he was in charge of Iraq from January
2009 through January 2017 and never made him answer for any of the key
moments he oversaw -- such as overturning the 2010 election and tossing
aside the votes of the Iraqi people via The Erbil Agreement in order to
give thug Nouri al-Maliki a second term, such as that second term which
saw paranoid Nouri persecute everyone resulting in the rise of ISIS in
Iraq, etc.
Here's Joe being asked about Iraq but, please note, this is by veterans, not by the media.
The
US media withdrew from Iraq at the end of 2008. That's the withdrawal
that mattered. ABC announced that any reporting on Iraq in the future
would come from BBC NEWS, that they would carry BBC's reports on Iraq.
Because, you know DISNEY-ABC-MARVEL-ET AL just didn't have the money to
spend on Iraq, right? (That's sarcasm.) CBS NEWS maintained a Baghdad
desk and they were really the only ones on TV who did. CNN didn't.
Jane Arraf moved over to NPR to continue to cover Iraq. THE WASHINGTON
POST continued their coverage as did ASSOCIATED PRESS; however, NYT
faltered after the hideous Jill Abramson made clear how little she cared
about Iraq. She ordered Anthony Shadid to Syria against his own better
judgment and vocal opposition. Let's be clear, his blood is on her
hands. As if being responsible for his death wasn't enough, she shot
down story after story about Iraq throughout 2012 because she didn't
want to 'harm' Barack Obama's chance at re-election. Timothy Arango had
tons of hard hitting reports but Jill didn't want to run them. He had a
full report about how US troops, during a presidential election, were
secretly being sent back into Iraq by Barack. But Jill didn't want to
run it. Finally, in the September 26th print edition of THE NEW YORK
TIMES, Tim Arango was allowed to inform the American people:
Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently
deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with
intelligence.
That wasn't on the front
page. It wasn't even in article about Iraq. To get it (finally) in the
paper, Tim had to put it in the middle of a report about Syria.
Grasp that. I know Jill's reputation is in ruins -- as it should be -- but it's in ruins because she finally got caught plagiarizing.
She's never faced press scrutiny over her actions that resulted in the
death of Anthony Shadid. She never faced press scrutiny for her refusal
to carry reports on Iraq.
If you missed it, Barack
Obama ran on the lie that he pulled US troops out of Iraq. Not only did
they never all leave -- and hold on, we'll come back to that -- but he
was also sending more in. Barack ran for re-election on that lie and
Mitt Romney helped him out by pretending the lie was true. (Mitt's so
stupid, it would be easy to say he didn't know; however, a number of
Republicans -- including Senator Lindsey Graham -- were calling on Mitt
to confront Barack over sending troops back in.)
This
was a huge story -- or should have been. But Jill didn't want to harm
Barack's chances. This year, we saw this non-journalistic approach
expand out to where everyone felt they had to cover for Joe, turn their
heads and pretend he didn't have his penis sticking out of his zipper.
Look the other way, change the subject.
Now let's work
one more thing in here about Iraq -- something Arwa doesn't note and, in
fact, few do. Iraq is crawling with CIA. Ted Koppel told us that
would be the case after the drawdown. And it was the case and remains
the case. Not just in the outpost on the northern border of Iraq that
Turkey provided the US government with during Bully Boy Bush's second
term in office, but throughout Iraq.
The
CIA is expected to maintain a large clandestine presence in Iraq and
Afghanistan long after the departure of conventional U.S. troops as part
of a plan by the Obama administration to rely on a combination of spies
and Special Operations forces to protect U.S. interests in the two
longtime war zones, U.S. officials said. U.S. officials said that the
CIA's stations in Kabul and Baghdad will probably remain the agency’s
largest overseas outposts for years, even if they shrink from record
staffing levels set at the height of American efforts in those nations
to fend off insurgencies and install capable governments.
We never talk about that, not in the press, not in our so-called anti-war groups.
But
the western media doesn't talk much about Iraq and it certainly doesn't
do 'think' pieces. Think pieces would note the CIA presence in Iraq,
for example. Think pieces would note how the US -- sometimes with
Iran's help -- keeps installing cowards to lead Iraq -- cowards who fled
Iraq under Saddam and only returned after US forces invaded in 2003.
Think pieces would note that the US military has been used to prop up
these rulers who aren't popular with the Iraqi people.
There
was no discussion about Iraq in the media during the primaries or the
general election. Letting Joe lie about a 2002 vote really isn't
addressing what's going on in Iraq today. Even Tulsi Gabbard, our
'anti-war' candidate, didn't discuss Iraq. For Tulsi, Iraq was an empty
space where US troops were stationed and they needed to come home. Now
I agree with the second part, US troops need to come home. But Iraq's
not an empty space. The Iraqi people are there and Tulsi never
acknowledged them or their ongoing suffering.
Early on,
we opposed every call for 'reparations to Iraq. Some well meaning
idiot, often an Iraq War veteran, would say that's what we needed for
Iraq right now.
I have no problem with reparations. I
have a huge problem with any money for the Iraqi people being handed
over to a corrupt government that not only does not represent them but
steals the Iraqi money. Transparency International has repeatedly, year
after year, ranked Iraq as one of the ten most corrupt countries in the
world -- over and over since the start of the Iraq War. And we're
going to help the Iraqi people by giving a corrupt government -- that
refuses to represent the Iraqi people -- millions of dollars in
reparations?
Maybe if that money had been handed
over, though, the US media could get over their own guilt. They were
complicit in this war. When that's noted, people will talk about how
they lied and offered uncritical coverage (don't call it reporting) in
the lead up to the Iraq War. That is true. But it's also true that
they were awful once the war started as well. They lied repeatedly.
And they lied to keep the Iraq War going.
There's one
guy who a number of people feel I'm too mean too. Clearly, I'm told, he
regrets his reporting now. Well, if he does, let him give up that
award -- the one he won for white washing the slaughter in Falluja.
That's the one that he also, please remember, let the US military censor
and that explains why it was a week before the report made it into the
paper. I'm being kind and not naming him right now but we've named him
many times before.
And if giving up that award that he
doesn't deserve is too damn much for him, he could certainly write a few
pages for THE NEW YORKER where he reconsiders what went down in Falluja
and writes the truth this time.
He won't. His hands are bloody.
Iraqi
children died because of him but I'm the bad person because I mention
that he lied and he didn't deserve the prize he was awarded? Or I mock
him because he was going to interview a resistance leader in Iraq until a
military officer told him not to do it. He worked for THE NEW YORK
TIMES or the US military? Or is it all one and the same?
He's on
our side -- I've heard that claim from supposed anti-war lefties -- to
my face. And I always reply back, "We're talking about the same guy,
right? The one who went on Hugh Hewitt's conservative radio program
about seven years ago and said the 2011 drawdown was the worst mistake
with regards to Iraq?
Grasp that. Not the invasion,
not the war itself, those weren't the worst mistakes. It was the
drawdown Barack and Joe carried out at the end of 2011. That's the guy
who is on our side?
Right. And the world of music has never been the same since the break up of the Revolution Evolution.
By
the way, it's interesting that this journalist felt that way enough to
talk about it on Hugh's show but not enough to write about that when Joe
Biden was running for president.
It honestly appears
that the journalist says whatever he thinks will make him be liked by
whomever he's speaking to which would explain the confusion on the part
of some 'anti-war' types who think the journalist is one of them.
Joe's
destroyed Iraq over and over. Strangely, Arwa can't find anyone who
can tell her that. Can't or refuses to? I know damn sure Ayad Allawi
will go on record and I know that because he has with the BBC among
others.
Oh, well, let's hope she put food on the
table with the check because she didn't accomplish anything else with
that lousy article.
Jo Jorgensen was the presidential
candidate for the Libertarian Party. I said we'd probably note her
again later this week. This isn't what I was talking about.
She's
stating in the interview that if there are irregularities, in the vote,
a court should review the issues. She's discussing other topics as
well but we're noting the above because she is correct. Refer to Jonathan Turley's column.
YOUTUBE tells you "The AP has called the presidential race for Joe
Biden." The AP? Not really mentioned in the Constitution.
I'm
not saying Donald won. I doubt he did. But he, or any candidate, has a
right to call for a recount or to seek legal recourse. December 14th
is when the electoral college votes. There is plenty of time to settle
the results. We want transparency. And we need to trust the result.
The media needs to be neutral on this topic because they are pouring gas
on the fire.
Oh, back in the day, this was major. We were more interested in this than "Thriller," if you can believe it. "Thriller" was a huge video but it was part of making Michael Jackson a super-star. "Bad" comes after that, after we've been waiting and waiting for the follow up and after we finally got something new, the so-so ballad "I Just Can't Stop Loving You." So "Bad" was something we were waiting for, a fast Michael Jackson song, a video with a story and a video directed by Martin Scorsese. The dancing does hold up. I will give it that. I think "Thriller," "Beat It," "Smooth Criminal" and "Black and White" are better videos. But this was huge at the time in that everybody talked about it. It was also part of the backlash against Michael because while some of us loved it in real time, it also saw others break away from Michael.
Videos used to be so huge. They're still big for country music, I guess. I'll see those when I flip the channels, music videos of country music. But we had so much when I was growing up -- MTV with videos around the clock, FRIDAY NIGHT VIDEOS, some video show that aired at 4:30 pm Monday through Friday -- it was where I first saw The Bangles with their song "Going Down To Liverpool" before they got huge a few years later. That video, by the way, featured guest star Leonard Nimoy. A lot of videos had guest stars. Even more had dancing.
"Love Is A Battlefield" was a big video in its time. Pat Benatar isn't really associated with dance but dancing was something everybody did.
Again, another big video. Story telling was also huge in videos. Donna Summer's "She Works Hard For The Money" was a big video.
There's a lie that Michael Jackson broke the color barrier on MTV. That's not true. Diana Ross' "Muscles" was big on MTV before THRILLER. Donna Summer had several songs that were played regularly as did Ray Parker Jr., Rick James and Prince.
What Michael did, and deserves credit for, is become the first Black superstar on MTV. His videos were played in heavy rotation. He really was the first. Before him, it really was just Diana's "Muscles" and Prince's "Little Red Corvette" that got heavy airplay -- and that was for the sexual nature of the videos and usually at night and the early morning. Michael changed all that and was the first Black artist who was played every hour on the hour.
Whitney's lesbian fans really lie for her and that's too bad because all they do is piss people off. I get it, she's your cult focus. But stop lying. They've repeatedly tried to lie that she did the same as Michael but a a woman.
Damn lies.
Nobody gave two s**ts about Whitney's videos when she was doing her ballads on the first album. It wasn't until the summer of '85 with "How Will I Know" that she really had a video presence -- and not until 1987 with "I Wanna Dance With Somebody" that she was actually a video star.
Before that took place? Diana was already a video star for MTV -- "Mirror, Mirror," "Why Do Fools Fall In Love," "Muscles," "All Of You" and "Swept Away" were played heavily on MTV. Tina Turner's "What's Love Got To Do With It" -- and all that followed -- were monster videos the way Michael's were -- played hourly. The Pointer Sisters had a string of blockbuster videos with "Jump," the re-released "I'm So Excited," "Neutron Dance" (we all loved seeing Eddie Murphy in the video and the Pointers acting as movie ushers, etc). By the time Whitney was finally a video star, 1987, it's also true that Janet Jackson was already there. 1986's CONTROL made Janet a video star. Not a sappy, middle-of-the-road crooner the way so much of Whitney's early hits made her. Janet was a star with "What Have You Done For Me Lately?," "Nasty," "Control," "The Pleasure Principle" -- all before Clive Davis finally realized young people loathed Whitney's tired videos and got her some action with "I Wanna Dance With Somebody."
The lie is a lie and I love how some people are so stupid that they think they can get away with it. Before the dance with somebody, the only video she had that people kind of responded to was "How Will I Know" in the summer of 85. The lie that she was the first? In that video we see a video of who? Oh, right, Aretha Franklin. And in 1985, before that song, Aretha already stormed MTV with "Freeway Of Love."
Whitney didn't do much of anything in the world of videos and that includes on BET. Her videos were usually sappy until her second album. They were cute little stories that your parents might love but that you just cringed over.
The video I loved most in the first-half of the 80s? Prince's "Little Red Corvette."
Tuesday, November 10, 2020. The election continues to dominate the
news, we look at some of the third party campaigns and the UN assists
the Iraqi government in making more people homeless.
Unlike the liberals and the Trumpists, many in
the US have come to understand that their
political system offers nothing but stultifying
stagnation for ordinary Americans by design,
even if it comes in two, smartly attired
flavours.
They see that the Trump camp rages ineffectually
against the corporate elite, deluded into
believing that a member of that very same elite
will serve as their saviour. And they see that
the Biden camp represents an ineffectual rainbow
coalition of competing social identities,
deluded into believing that those divisions will
make them stronger, not weaker, in the fight for
economic justice. Both of these camps appear
resigned to being serially – maybe ritually –
disappointed.
Failure does not inspire these camps to seek
change, it makes them cling all the more
desperately to their failed strategies, to
attach themselves even more frantically and
fervently to their perceived tribe.
That is why this US election – at a moment when
the need for real, systemic change is more
urgent, more evident than ever before – produced
not just one but two of the worst presidential
candidates of all time. We are looking at
exactly what happens when a whole society not
only stops growing but begins to putrefy.
No matter who won, what U.S. politics lacks is real choice. Both
major parties function as cheerleaders for capitalism under all
circumstances, even when a killer pandemic coincides with a major
capitalist crash. Real political choice would require a party that
criticizes capitalism and offers a path toward social transition beyond
capitalism. Countless polls prove that millions of U.S. citizens want to
consider socialist criticisms of capitalism and socialist alternatives
to it. The mass of voters for Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
and other socialists provided yet more evidence. However, the system
allowed and enabled a near-fascistic right wing to take over the GOP and
the presidency. At the same time, it aided and abetted the Democrats in
excluding a socialist from even running for that presidency. Trump and
Biden are long-standing, well-known cheerleaders for capitalism. Sanders
was, in contrast, a critic.
A new political party that offered systemic criticisms of capitalism
and advocated for a transition to a worker-coop based economic system
would bring real choice into U.S. politics. It would place before the
electorate a basic question of vital importance: what mix of capitalist
and worker-coop organized enterprises do you wish to work for, buy from,
and live with in the United States? Voters could thereby genuinely
participate in deciding the range of job descriptions from which each of
us will become able to choose. Will we mostly have to accept positions
as employees whose jobs are designed exclusively by and for employers?
Or will all job descriptions include at least two basic tasks: a
specific function within an enterprise’s division of labor plus an equal
share (alongside all other enterprise workers) of the powers to design
and direct the enterprise as a whole?
Any community that wishes to call itself a “democracy” for more than
rhetorical, self-promotional reasons should welcome a one-person,
one-vote decision-making process governing how work is organized.
Most adults spend most of their lives at work. How that work is
organized shapes how their lives are lived and what skills, aptitudes,
appetites, and relationships they develop. Their work influences their
other social roles as friends, lovers, spouses, and parents. In
capitalism, the work experience of the vast majority (employees) is
shaped and controlled by a small minority (employers) to secure the
latter’s profit, wealth accumulation, and reproduction as the socially
dominant minority. In a real democracy, the economy would have to be
democratically reorganized. Workplace decisions would be made on the
basis of one person, one vote inside each enterprise. Parallel,
similarly democratic decision-making would govern residential
communities surrounding and interacting with workplaces. Workplace and
residential democracies would have significant influences over one
another’s decisions. In short, genuine economic democracy would be the
necessary partner to political democracy.
Over at WSWS, Genevieve Leigh notes
AOC's selling out of the voters in her CNN STATE OF THE UNION
appearance and the article at THE NEW YORK TIMES over the weekend and
Leigh concludes:
What the 2020 elections and their aftermath have definitively shown
is that nothing progressive can be advanced within the framework of the
Democratic Party and its so-called “left” representatives such as
Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders. A Biden administration will rapidly come into
conflict with the working class, fueling a growth of the class struggle
and posing the necessity for a mass independent movement fighting for
socialism.
There is an immense constituency for socialist politics
in the working class in the US and around the world. But the organic
striving for an alternative to capitalism must be turned into a
conscious movement armed with a revolutionary socialist and
internationalist program. This requires the development of a new
political leadership in the working class. The central issue is the
building of the Socialist Equality Party and its youth organization, the International Youth and Students for Social Equality.
I
have no real problem with Genevieve and think she does a great job of
documenting AOC's sell out but it is true that, if she believes the last
two paragraphs of her own article, she might need to speak with David
North and Joseph Kishore at her own magazine. I don't know how the
lunatic conspiracy theories that they were allowed to pimp in the last
six weeks prior to the election were supposed to help build the SEP and,
in fact, those articles were really designed to scare and frighten
people into voting for Joe Biden.
All by itself, that's
bad enough; however, when you factor in that Joseph Kishore was the
presidential nominee of the WSWS and pretending to run for president,
it's even more disgusting.
The world is awful enough. You don't
have to invent fantasies and present them as reality. If we're around
in 2024, there's a very good chance that we will not note the SEP
candidate. That will be due to Joseph Kishore spending the final six
weeks of his passive campaign refusing to make a case for himself and
the SEP and, instead, offering lunatic fantasies about what Donald Trump
might do in an effort to sheep-herd people into voting for Joe Biden.
I
liked Joseph Kishore up until then. I found him a strong writer and,
while I didn't think he'd win the presidency, I hoped he'd build up the
SEP.
Instead, he dropped his own campaign to churn out
the vote for Joe. It read like he was scared -- of winning, of
advancing the SEP, of breathing.
I don't handle fear
well. And I don't like those who try to campaign on fear. We called
out THE NATION when they pulled that crap about
this-is-the-torture-election. No, not this year, Several election
cycles back.
I expected more from Joseph Kishore.
Equally true, prior to the last embarrassing six weeks, he didn't do
much of anything. His campaign site -- such as it was -- just directed
you to WSWS where he had commentaries posted. He was unable to do a
video a week. Or even one a month.
I don't know why
the SEP ran a candidate to begin with if they didn't want to spread the
word about the SEP. Maybe it's not constructive for them to run a
candidate at this time and they should just focus on issues?
They
need to look at what they did this election cycle and figure out what
they're striving for because Joseph Kishore's campaign was a waste of
time and distracted WSWS from very real issues -- even before David
North and Joseph Kishore started their End Of Times nonsense.
While we're noting third parties, let's note this from the Green Party:
Greens Also Retain Ballot Status in Washington D.C. As Nationwide Results Continue to Roll In
WASHINGTON — Overcoming immense challenges including “anyone but
Trump”, pandemic campaigning conditions, nationwide panic about election
integrity and four years of smears from the corporate oligarchy, the
Green Party emerged from Election Day with 11 wins in the state of
California and Oregon, and achievements elsewhere.
Contact: Michael O’Neil, Communications Manager, meo@gp.org Holly Hart, Co-chair, Media Committee, media@gp.org Craig Seeman, Co-chair, Media Committee, media@gp.org
Greens across the country are celebrating 26-year-old
Emmanuel Estrada’s winning the office of Mayor of Baldwin Park, CA. That
makes him, along with Mayor Bruce Delgado in Marina, CA the highest
elected Green official in the country.
“We’re going in at the right time to reform the image of
the city, to reform the image of City Hall, and we’re in the perfect
position to do that,” said Estrada, who took out a second job to finance
his campaign.
This week’s Green wins add to 10 electoral victories from earlier in the year.
“We have weathered the storm,” said Green Party National
Steering Committee member Hillary Kane. “Since 2016, the two-party power
structure accelerated their efforts to exterminate us, to scapegoat us
for their own failures and corruption. We have endured and we are
already rallying to come back stronger than ever.”
Green victories in races that have been called, so far, include:
Emmanuel Estrada, Mayor of Baldwin Park, CA
David Grover for City Council of Trinidad, CA (re-elected)
Sylvia R. Chavez for City Council (At-Large) of Calipatria, CA
Sharron Parra for Hyampom, CA Community Service District
Michael Paul Hansen for Humboldt County, CA Community Services District
John Abraham “Abe” Powell for Montecito, CA Fire Protection District (re-elected)
Randy Marx, Fair Oaks Water District (Sacramento County) (re-elected)
Matthew Clark, Granada Community Services District (San Mateo County) (re-elected)
Jane Jarlsberg for Joshua Basin Water District, Division 3 in San Bernardino County, CA
Josiah Dean for City Council of Dufur, OR (re-elected)
Michael Clary for Soil and Water Conservation, Zone 4 in Coos County, OR (re-elected)
In the races of Jake Tonkel for City Council in San Jose,
CA and the re-election of Jessica Clayton to the Brick Township, NJ
Board of Education, the candidates are awaiting final tabulation of
votes.
“Greens are so grateful to our 2020 class of 210 candidates
who contested offices at every level of government” said Green Party
National Co-Chair Tamar Yager. “We are especially proud of Lisa Savage
winning 5% of the vote as the first Green to run in a Ranked Choice
Voting Election for US Senate (ME) and Franca Muller Paz for the
inspiring ‘Green-Red’ coalition she led in her run for Baltimore City
Council, earning 36.6% of the vote,” continued Yager.
“Ann Wilcox’s grassroots campaign for At-Large Member of
the Washington DC City Council has renewed ballot access for the DC
Statehood Green Party, allowing local Green candidates to remain
competitive,” said Kane.
“We are constantly asked why Greens run for citywide and
statewide offices, and for president, in lieu of smaller districts,”
Kane continued. “In many cases, it’s because we have a candidate with a
unique and essential political agenda the Democrats and Republicans will
otherwise erase but, just as often, it’s also because rules set up by
the duopoly require winning votes for the bigger offices in order to
have a ballot line to compete for the local ones,” said Kane.
“2020 has been a rough year for Greens,” said Green Party
National Co-Chair Kristin Combs. “It’s been a rough year for the entire
country. But the machine that suppresses candidates’ rights and voter
choice is breaking down. Almost 1.5 million people in Massachusetts cast
ballots in favor of Ranked Choice Voting when many had never heard of
it before this year — and the ‘Yes’ campaign team’s grassroots education
efforts were severely hampered by COVID-19,” said Combs.
Green leaders also expressed support and appreciation for
Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker, the Green Party’s nominees for
President and Vice-President.
“Their Eco-Socialist, Left-Unity campaign was desperately
needed to offer real solutions for 2020,” said Green Party National
Co-Chair Gloria Mattera. “Howie and Angela ran for a Green New Deal.
Both Biden and Trump oppose the Green New Deal. They ran for
Improved/Expanded Medicare-For-All. Both Biden and Trump reject that.
They ran on dismantling the US military empire. Biden and Trump are both
war hawks.”
“Now we ask Greens to organize to ensure every vote is
counted, which we demand in every election, and organize to win. Spring
elections are just around the corner.”
Howie Hawkins was the Green Party's presidential candidate. Ann noted this statement from his campaign:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 7, 2020
For Further Information:
Virginia Rodino, virginia@howiehawkins.us
Robert Smith, robert@howiehawkins.us
Hawkins and Walker React To Trump’s Defeat
We are happy to see Trump go. Good riddance!
This election was a referendum on Trump. Biden was Not-Trump, nothing
more. Biden has no solutions for the climate, poverty, racism, and
nuclear war.
The Hawkins/Walker campaign thanks our supporters for their donations
and campaign work in a difficult year for the Green Party and
independent socialists. The media blanked us out. After the Democratic
establishment closed ranks to defeat Bernie Sanders, most progressive
leaders lined up behind Biden without making any policy demands on him.
The Biden administration is now free to ignore them.
We will continue to fight for a Green New Deal, an Economic Bill of
Rights including Medicare for All, and a reprioritization of federal
spending from militarism to caring for the people and the planet. We
will continue organizing toward a major party of the green and socialist
left and supporting the election of thousands to local office and, on
that foundation, to state legislatures and Congress as we go into the
2020s.
We are running out of time on the climate, declining working-class
life expectancies, and the new nuclear arms race. Real solutions can’t
wait.
We are determined, not defeated.
###
Ann noted:
Howie ran a real campaign. And Howie stood for what mattered.
A
few years back, it was Howie who came up with the Green New Deal. And
it will be Hoeiw and people like him who introduce the important ideas
that influence our future. People like Joe Biden are just
reactionaries, they can't actually lead.
I agree
with Ann's call. I didn't follow the 2000 Green Party campaign --
Ralph Nader was the nominee. He lost me with his idiotic comments in a
ROLLING STONE INTERVIEW -- no, Ralph, problems high heels cause is not
the most pressing issue for the feminist movement and statements like
that really made me dislike you. But I did pay attention to the 2004
campaign, the 2008, the 2012, the 2016 and the 2020.
I
thought that he and Angela Walker ran one of the best. Cynthia McKinney
and Rosa Clemente (2008 -- I voted for them) might be the only ones to
surpass them. But that's a ''might be.''
Howie fought
and took stands and he didn't go silent when idiots and CIA-factions
attacked him. I also am very pleased that Greens are finally grasping
what Ava and I said back in 2008 -- stop treating Amy Goodman like she's
your friend because she's not. She has never given the Green Party
equal time. This go round, she made that very clear by refusing to have
Howie on DEMOCRACY NOW! even once, by refusing to even give a headline
at the top of the show to the Green Party's political convention and by
mentioning Howie only once, when they allowed a liar to lie about ballot
access issues on the show. Shame on Amy. And shame on Juan Gonzales
as well. Juan was once a lion, now he's a declawed, cowardly fool.
That moment was as embarrassing but, if I'm honest, Juan really sold out
in 2008. That year started with him calling out Barack -- and Amy
keeping him off the show. Then Juan of the Barack-alognie column came
on board and got to be on the show. Whores got whore. Et tu, Juan?
As many people around the country and the world celebrate the media’s
announcement of the defeat of President Trump, those who advocate for
transformational changes in the political, economic, legal and social
systems are talking and writing about the challenges we’ll face under a
Biden/Harris administration.
Democracy, literally ‘people power,’ is feared by the wealthy elites.
Whether they are represented by Democrats or Republicans, they work to
suppress it. Social movements can expect to face significant hurdles
under a Biden administration in the next four years. However, if we know
what to expect, we can use tactics to get past them and have some
victories.
If conditions don’t improve, then there will be greater polarization
and conflict within the country. This will give the state more
justification for repression. If we succeed, and win victories for the
poor and working class while building democracy at the grassroots level,
we will be on a path towards the transformation we seek.
When the media called the election on Saturday, there were
celebrations by Biden-supporters in the streets. People popped champagne
corks and honked their horns. Some people see the election of
Biden/Harris as a huge victory and hope it will mean changes that impact
their lives positively.
Glenn Greenwald brings things back into perspective in his article
comparing the Trump administration to the past two presidencies. Even
though Trump was portrayed, especially by liberals, as some sort of
monster, Greenwald writes:
There is nothing done by the Trump administration that
can be rationally characterized as a radical aberration, some dramatic
break, from U.S. tradition. Quite the contrary: none of Trump’s actions
and policies are in some new universe of savagery, lawlessness, or
radicalism when compared to those who preceded him in power.
Although Trump was very open about it, neoliberalism, militarism,
racism and imperialism will continue under a Biden presidency. Biden did
not even feign progressivism during the campaign. As Caitlin Johnstone
points out in “US Murder Machine Now under Competent Management,” “Trump ran on a platform of scaling back US interventionism, as did Obama, as did even Bush, but Biden did the opposite.
He is beginning from a much more hawkish position than he [sic]
predecessors right off the bat.” The big question is whether or not
Biden will be as competent as Obama was at getting away with it.
During the Obama administration, the peace movement struggled to
survive even while Obama militarized Africa, surrounded China, destroyed
Libya, increased drone attacks and more. Note that these are countries
with majority non-white populations. People were reluctant to criticize
the first black president and funding for the peace movement
disappeared.
The Black Alliance for Peace and other groups have been working to
rebuild an anti-imperialist peace movement over the past four years. In
their recent statement,
the Black Alliance for Peace reminds us that the situation does not
change for colonized and oppressed people no matter who sits in the
“white people’s house.”
Kevin Zeese's passing is among the big losses of 2020
I'm
not finding a statement from Gloria La Riva's campaign. She was the
presidential nominee for the Party for Socialism and Liberation. She
had many technical issues beyond her control. There was a period where
GOOGLE was censoring her website -- the standard 'malware' nonsense.
And the last full week of the campaign, she had an important event that
had to be called off due to technical issues. But Gloria ran a strong
campaign and was very effective in promoting her ideas and beliefs
across the landscape -- a candidate who can speak Spanish and English
will always be sought after and Gloria gave some very strong interviews
to Spanish language outlets.
While I don't see a statement from Gloria, the Party for Socialism and Liberation issued the following:
More than 70 million people voted to oust Donald Trump in the Nov. 3
election. This was not a vote for Joe Biden, a truly uninspiring
candidate who only became the nominee when the Democratic Party ruling
class establishment united to stop Bernie Sanders from getting the
nomination in early March. Nor did the historic voter turnout for Biden
signify support for his pro-Wall Street, pro-war positions and his role
as an architect of the current system of policing and mass
incarceration.
In the last few minutes, the major corporate-owned media networks all
announced that Joe Biden had sufficient electoral college votes to
become the next president of the United States.
It is noteworthy that Fox News, which has been so vociferously
cheerleading for Donald Trump during the last four years, also called
the election for Biden and dramatically changed the tone of its coverage
to be very supportive of Biden and the campaign he ran.
Donald Trump insists that he will fight on. He argues that he is the
true winner of the election and the only reason that he might not be
president is because of widespread election fraud. This is not true and
as more and more of the mail-in vote arrived in Pennsylvania, Georgia
and other states it became crystal clear that Trump in fact had lost the
electoral college vote in a very narrow contest that almost exactly
replicates the narrow outcome in 2016 but with the margins reversed.
Trump broke the cardinal rule of U.S. capitalist politics when he
denounced the election system as a fraud. Maintaining the image of a
peaceful transfer of power between the two ruling class parties for more
than a century has been considered a core element of American
capitalist governance. The peaceful transfer of power bestows legitimacy
upon the system. Every system requires either undiluted brute violence
that is routinely dispensed on oppressed classes, or it relies on its
legitimacy with a sector of the population which is then, of course,
supplemented by the threat of violence and state coercion. “Democracy”
is the preferred form of class rule because achieving legitimacy with a
significant sector of the working class and intermediate strata makes
the system easier to maintain. It avoids the tension and conflict which
makes class rule more complicated and unstable.
Trump’s motivation is very narrow and personal. Once out of office,
he and his family will be subject to multiple criminal prosecutions and
civil legal cases in many states on issues related to tax evasion,
financial fraud and other such crimes. If Trump becomes a civilian, he
loses his immunities for state-based prosecutions on financial crimes.
This will be Trump’s future and he knows it. The ruling class will not
sacrifice the legitimacy of its political system to protect Donald Trump
in his post-presidency civilian life.
Trump has spent the last days trying to use ultra-right and fascist
mobilizations to stop the vote count. But he has become increasingly
isolated. His base of support within the capitalist establishment is
crumbling and that will continue. The fact that Fox News and the Wall
Street Journal editorial board have turned against him in his quest to
condemn the election process is a clear indication that his fate has
been sealed.
The 2020 presidential election was a referendum on Trump. The
Democrats did very badly in the rest of the election. They lost seats to
the Republicans in the House and they failed to win the Senate. The
fact that it was a close election at the presidential level at a time of
the biggest healthcare catastrophe and mass unemployment in living
memory shows how little the Democratic Party has to offer the masses of
people. The Democratic Party ruling class establishment adopted a
center-right orientation and refused to embrace the demands for Medicare
for All; a cancellation of rents and mortgage payments during the
pandemic; canceling student debt; or meaningful policing reforms.
Ironically, the same Democratic Party establishment now blames the left
for its failures in the down ballot contests during the election.
The Party for Socialism and Liberation has argued since 2016 that
Donald Trump is merely a symptom of a larger disease. Late stage
capitalism is destroying not only the working class and poor but big
sectors of the middle class. As the billionaires get ever richer and
more powerful, the level of human suffering inside “the richest country
in the world” increases rapidly. The larger disease is capitalism, and
the cure is to replace the system that fosters poverty amid plenty and
destroys workers as a tiny class of the ultra rich concentrate wealth
and power. The solution lies not with the Democratic Party but with the
replacement of capitalism by a humane, rational and sustainable social
system: socialism.
The task at hand is to build a mass movement demanding that the Biden
White House take immediate emergency measures to eradicate mass
unemployment; provide a livable guaranteed income for all of those who
have been made jobless; cancel rents, evictions and foreclosures; cancel
student debt; and adopt a Medicare for all healthcare system. At the
same time, we have to mobilize greater opposition to U.S. militarism and
war, which is not even slightly diminished under a government led by
Joe Biden.
Jo Jorgensen was the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate. Jo's campaign issued the following:
Jorgensen’s Libertarian presidential campaign was cost-effective
A ‘grassroots effort propelled by heart and hard work,’ says Dr. Jo Jorgensen
GREENVILLE, S.C.; November 7, 2020— The
presidential campaign of Libertarian Dr. Jo Jorgensen relied more on
volunteers, efficiency, and persuasion than on money to win votes.
With 1,731,055 votes won as of Nov. 7, the Jorgensen campaign spent a
modest $1.73 for each vote. The campaign raised and spent approximately
$3 million.
The Jorgensen campaign topped the cost-effectiveness of all other
Libertarian presidential campaigns. Of the last three runs, former
Governor Gary Johnson’s 2012 and 2016 campaigns spent $3.13 and $2.66
per vote, respectively, and former Congressman Bob Barr’s 2008 campaign
spent $2.68 per vote.
In contrast, Democrat Joe Biden’s campaign spent $12.50 per vote, which rises to $18.40 per vote when dark money* is included.
In the Democratic primary election, Bernie Sanders spent $28.87 per vote, and Elizabeth Warren spent $50.09.
“This grassroots campaign was propelled by heart and hard work,” said
Jorgensen, “and it was guided by veteran Libertarians who helped make
our modest funds go far.”
The Jorgensen campaign recruited at least 9,423 volunteers. The average donation to her campaign was $32.
*According to the Center for Responsive Politics’ analysis at OpenSecrets.org, citing the campaign’s Oct. 14 reports.
We'll
probably note Jo again later this week. But for now, let's note that
Jo campaigned with the people, among the people. Jo wasn't the Hiding
Jo (that would be Joe Biden). She went all over on her campaign bus and
held events. Which is the only way to run a non-fear based campaign.
She attracted actual crowds. She presented herself well throughout.
Had she been brought on for the debates, I think she might have won one
of the two debates -- maybe both.
Iraq War veteran Adam Kokesh notes a Libertarian victory in this election:
Turning to Iraq where the number of Covid 19 cases has now topped 500,000.
In
the face of the pandemic, with the help of the United Nations, the
Iraqi government is eager to make more people homeless by closed the
camps for the displaced.
The
rapid closure of displacement camps in Iraq could leave more than
100,000 people without shelter in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic
and as winter approaches, an aid group has warned.
Iraq’s Displacement Ministry said in late October that it was moving
ahead with closures as part of a program of “safe and voluntary return.”
Aid groups and human rights researchers say that in practice, civilians
are often ordered to leave their displacement camp on short notice and
without clarity on whether it will be possible to return to the areas
they came from.
On the
journey, some risk being waylaid at checkpoints because of a lack of
adequate paperwork or because their names are on lists of alleged
Islamic State members or are similar to listed names.
Human rights groups say these lists are often unreliable and based on confessions carried out under torture.
“Closing
camps before residents are willing or able to return to their homes
does little to end the displacement crisis,” Jan Egeland, secretary
general for the Norwegian Refugee Council, said Monday. “On the
contrary, it keeps scores of displaced Iraqis trapped in this vicious
cycle of displacement, leaving them more vulnerable than ever,
especially in the middle of a raging pandemic.”
