"That doesn’t require that everyone do the same thing in common—a giant left sing-along. It does require that we build into our organizational plans some explicit space for quiet, for informal get-togethers, for family activities and parties (sedate and rowdy), for discussion groups, rock bands, street theater, softball teams. We should be much more inviting. Come on in, let’s take the country back, this is going to be a kick—that should be the message people get, along with no apologies for the extreme seriousness of what we’re about. We’re fighting now for democracy, for the dignity of our own lives. And we are losing. To win, we need to get serious, come together, and get moving."
Spoken 20 years ago.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
३६ टिप्पण्या:
Hope. Change.
Oh god..it's about the New Party. Yeah they took over Missoula. It's basically about young white college grads moving here from back East (for the diversity you know) and taking over local government. And then mandating neighborhood groups, weekly festivals, street calming, and outdoor pianos, etc. Whatever the other nice college towns were doing.
I guess we must have had it coming.
The floggings will continue until morale improves.
The difference between liberals and progressives is that progressives actually believe in democracy. They think that the people, if [they are] properly organized and equipped, can govern themselves, and that if they do the results will be better than if they do not.
Progressives already have the power to govern themselves. What they want is the power to govern other people. They already have way too much of that.
"progressives actually believe in democracy"
Right. When Californians voted to impose strictures on illegal immigrants, or Michiganders voted for race-neutral college admissions, or people in many places voted against SSM, Progs totally respected the outcomes, because, after all, they believe in democracy.
By contrast, when an unelected justice invented a new-fangled "right" to SSM, Progs were up in arms because, believing in democracy as they do, they just hated the process even if they liked the outcome.
Similarly, when the Obama administration tries to push through a nuclear deal with Iran or executive amnesty for illegal aliens, Progs uniformly oppose those actions, because they are so blatantly undemocratic.
"Come on in, let’s take the country back, ..."
Wait a sec here — 20 years ago Billy Jeff Clinton was president. Lefties already had the country. Whom did they think they needed to take it back from?
The article uses the first four paragraphs establishing Joel Rogers' left-liberal bona fides before the author starts to dip his toe into Rogers' ideas.
This is a common rhetorical pattern in media directed at true believers. Before we can listen to his ideas, we have to be sure he is one of us.
To the rest of us, it tends to discredit what he has to say. Indeed, this guy is more interested in the ascendency of his team than he is in making the country a better place to live. And as such, his is a worthless aspiration.
"...the simple notion that everyday people must have a major role in shaping the decisions that affect their lives."
Whoa there buddy. I think most of the decisions that affect your life should be made in Washington, D.C. And I'd say about 93% of Democrats and 99.9% of Progs agree with me.
campy said...
"Come on in, let’s take the country back, ..."
Wait a sec here — 20 years ago Billy Jeff Clinton was president. Lefties already had the country. Whom did they think they needed to take it back from?
In the 1994 elections, Republicans won control of Congress. It was the first time they'd controlled the Senate since the 1980s and the first time in 40 years they controlled the House. That's who he wanted to take the country back from.
"We need to find ways of genuinely enjoying, not just respecting, each other’s company again."
A great scene from "The Internship" with John Goodman as the Boss.
Boss: Lorraine, what time is it?
Lorraine: (Looking at cell phone) It's 3 o'clock.
Nic: One hip, pioneering secretary does not a cultural trend make.
Boss: She's 75 years old. Watches are obsolete, and so are the two of you.
Nic: Hey. Obsolete? What does that even mean?
Boss: It means everything's computerized now. It's cheaper for a machine to tell these companies what to order than a manufacturer's rep. They don't need us anymore.
Nic: No, people have a deep mistrust of machines. - That's right. Have you seen Terminator? People want to deal with
people, not Terminators.
Boss: People hate people!
Boss: Times have changed.
Nic: That's so negative.
Boss: Luckily, I saw this coming, cashed out my retirement, bought a condo in Miami Beach, new tits for the wife. Silicone... it's legal again.
Nic: Wow. - Saline's out?
Boss: Yeah, me and the old lady are going to be tucked away real nice.
Thanks for the reminder, Larry J. I sometimes forget that control of congress used to matter once upon a time before the 'pen and phone' era.
"We’re fighting now for democracy, for the dignity of our own lives. And we are losing."
Interesting that this sentiment is found across the political spectrum. We're struggling. And the country is slipping away from us.
We need to find ways of genuinely enjoying, not just respecting, each other’s company again.
Yep, just gotta ENJOY being baptized in the holy waters of mother progressivism. Then we par-tay! So long as we keep those heathen conservatives at bay it will be a hoot!
And we focused on this guy because.....? Surely it is not because we feel the need for comity across the political aisle? Hardly his message. Or are we concerned on hints of blue on blue discord?
He also said (in 1996):
“America remains blessed with abundance, free of external military threat, and populated by a spirited and resourceful people no more stupid or corrupt than any other,”
And now Mr. Rogers is 64.
"In the 1994 elections, Republicans won control of Congress. It was the first time they'd controlled the Senate since the 1980s and the first time in 40 years they controlled the House. That's who he wanted to take the country back from."
I do believe that after forty years of being in the majority in the House, the Dems had come to believe they had a divine right to rule that chamber. Hell, I was starting to believe it. Losing had to really take the wind out of their sails. Whatever else Newt Gingrich has done, he punched a hole in that sense of inevitability that the House has to be Democratic. And it wasn't a one-off. Most years since then it's been Republican.
From the article: "New Party members have working majorities on the city council in Missoula, Montana, and the county board in Milwaukee,"
The result of the actions of the county board during this period were so terrible that 70-30 Democrat-voting Milwaukee County elected Scott Walker as Milwaukee County Executive! Thanks New Party!
Well, he's right about one thing - the "progressives" are extremely serious about imposing their values upon the economy and culture.
They're not about singing KumBahYah ... he'll be one of the first to shove dissenters into the cattle cars bound for reeducation camp.
That is, if they win the coming civil war.
Geniuses. Whose plans always end in failure. Odd isn't it?
The problem, or depending on your outlook, the salvation, of Mr. Roger's idea is that it is incoherent. The idea of local control, solving problems as close to the source as possible is a conservative concept. Progressives are all about creating new government programs whenever there is a problem and either banning or regulating out of existence private organizations.
There was a time when the left was experimenting with things like communes, coops and mutual aid societies. They have unfortunately left that behind, they have opted for using the law to force people to do the things they used to try and encourage with persuasion.
His attempt to distinguish between liberals and progressives falls short of genius. But one of the consequences of thinking like a lefty and sharing their company for years is erosion of the intellect.
Well, "progressive" government-sniffers and State-fellators, you might take your hands out of people's pockets and stop putting guns to their heads. That might make you some friends.
A review of his curriculum vitae shows that most of his published work in the 21st Century is either as an editor or co-writer. So basically, very little of his recent ideas or work is his own.
Only one word for this drop off in academic production: Tenure
Come on in, let’s take the country back
Holder says that is racist.
And why is the "we need to get along" never followed by "Let's try things YOUR way this time"?
he'll be one of the first to shove dissenters into the cattle cars bound for reeducation camp.
The tin foil hat doesn't protect you from being outted as a dissenter?
You should educate yourself on the repression and violence employed by Leftists throughout history. The Lois Lerners of this world don't send people to reducation camps only because they don't think they could get away with it ... yet.
Or maybe it's the term "reeducation camp" with which you object. How about "gulag"?
He cribbed this from a speech Bezos gave to new hires at Amazon. Bezos has since refined his thinking.
I think it is important that the culture of the progressive movement should be a learning culture—one that supports wide-ranging discussion and that is resolutely nondogmatic in its willingness to confront changed circumstances.
The problem is that if you really do as he suggests, you come to the realization that the conservatives got there first.
It sounds like he's saying the progs need to distract voters with fun and community and then use the resulting social connections to influence their voting.
Not sure why this is deemed a breakthrough.
You should educate yourself on the repression and violence employed by Leftists throughout history.
You say that as if those are traits unique to Leftists.
"You say that as if those are traits unique to Leftists."
Maybe not unique, but applied as a first or second tactical choice far more frequently throughout history, with greater vigor and depth, and with less remorse.
Meanwhile . . . good work, government-sniffers and State-fellators!
http://reason.com/blog/
Reason has become nearly unreadable lately. I get it that you think illegal immigration is just peachy. Libertarianism isn't anarchy and they seem to have not noticed it.
Barack Obama joined the New Party in 1996.
Or did he?
Here is Politico, disputing that Obama ever joined up.
"We didn't really have members," said Rogers.
Either you are the most useless and ridiculous political party in the world, or that's a dishonest thing to say. (Embarrassed by his own comment, Rogers e-mailed to clarify: "I meant that there was no formal membership structure...")
Obama's own website ("FIght the Smears") refers to his possible membership in the New Party as a "crackpot smear against Barack."
What is this "crackpot smear"? The allegation is that Obama in 1996 joined a party whose "central aim was to move the United States steadily closer to European social democracy." Stanley Kurtz has done a pretty good job of digging up party records.
What's striking about this is the dishonesty. Obama claiming he has no ideology, and Rogers claiming that his party had no members. Even the name of his party, the New Party, stinks of the vacuous front. Let's put up the shiny facade while we do other things in secret. This is populist?
madisonfella said...
You should educate yourself on the repression and violence employed by Leftists throughout history.
You say that as if those are traits unique to Leftists.
In the last century they seemed to be. Especially genocide of ones own citizens.
More chum.
damikesc, just because someone references an article in Reason showing how further down the Road to Serfdom we are slipping, doesn't mean that person is giving an imprimatur to everything that appears in Reason.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा