Archive for the ‘Progressives’ Category

LA Mayor Eric Garcetti to progressives: Don’t make winning the argument more important than progress – Los Angeles Times

May 16, 2017, 7:33 a.m.

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti warned a ballroom full of progressive leaders Tuesday not to get bogged down in making sure that you win the argument instead of moving progress forward.

Garcetti told his listeners he knew they were upset by "the political moment that we are in. Butevery day we spend playing defense is a day were not making progress. If we define ourselves solely by our opposition to this administration, we will sell ourselves short and more important, we will sell the American people short."

Garcetti spoke Tuesday at the Center for American Progress' Ideas Conference in Washington at a time whenmany Democrats are trying to determine what's next for their party after unexpected electoral losses in November. The conference is seen by many as an early cattle call of potential 2020 presidential candidates. Garcetti, who was just reelected to a second term, and others who've been floated as possible candidates are participating in the daylong event including Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

Several other Californians are speaking at the conference, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco);Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), who isthe ranking Democrat on the House Select Intelligence Committee;and climate change activist and billionaire Tom Steyer.

Los Angeles has pushed back against multipleTrump administrationpolicies in part by setting aside funding for legal services for immigrants in the country illegally and pledging to adopt the Paris climateaccord if the administration decides to pull the United States out of the agreement, both of which could help Garcetti gain statewide or national attention. Throughout his speech, Garcetti, the only mayor invited to speak at the conference, argued that cities will continue to move forward on ideas such as free community college and expanding infrastructure even if Washington remains stuck.

The future is here, and the American people are waiting for somebody to step up, to lead us with the confidence and courage we need. Sodont cede the power you have before you exercise it. Dont ...fall into the trap of being paralyzed with fear and with anger. Dont fight pessimism with more pessimism, Garcetti said.

Read more here:
LA Mayor Eric Garcetti to progressives: Don't make winning the argument more important than progress - Los Angeles Times

Michael Spevacek: Progressives should welcome Constitutional Convention – Madison.com

Dear Editor: Instead of resisting a convention of states to propose a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution, progressives should welcome this historic and nationally televised debate to talk about the $11.5 trillion of federal spending since 1998 that can't be accounted for.

The purpose of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, the Government Management Reform Act of 1994, the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996, and the Accountability of Tax Dollars Act of 2002 was to ensure transparency and prevent a "black budget" from funding a shadow government. Most federal agencies comply with the law except for the Department of Defense, which can't properly account for over $5 trillion.

This is "fun money" that can be used for any purpose that unelected, unaccountable and unidentified agents want. Did any of this missing money pay for covert wars or other secret operations? It would be interesting to finally find out.

Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, has a very simple proposition: "Run the money according to the law." As a provision of the Balanced Budget Amendment, let's insist that if a federal agency can't comply with transparency laws, it simply doesn't get funding.

$11.5 trillion amounts to over half of the current federal debt. Looking for money to forgive student debt or fund health care for all? This might make a dent. As an added bonus we could discover that we really don't need to spend as much on war creation as we've been led to believe.

Michael Spevacek

Madison

Send your letter to the editor to tctvoice@madison.com. Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.

Go here to read the rest:
Michael Spevacek: Progressives should welcome Constitutional Convention - Madison.com

Guest MINDSETTER Stewart: Local Progressives Aiming Gun at Own Foot, Will They Pull Trigger? – GoLocalProv

Email to a friend Permalink

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Guest MINDSETTER Andrew Stewart

I am not a dolt and, as someone who has studied media history, I recognize this narrative discourse quite clearly. Unfortunately many local progressives do not and it is to all our peril. Essentially everyone is being played by the deceptive, manipulative and corrupt media responsible for, among other things, justifying the Iraq war with a false story about WMDs, biased coverage of the recent presidential campaign to favor Hillary Clinton at the expense of Bernie Sanders, and a whole host of other fake news stories that have been used to the detriment of the public. So heres my brief on how unfathomably and unbelievably dangerous this Russia nonsense actually is.

Since at the latest 2012, the overwhelming majority of the population has been getting pretty sick of what has been known for 25 years as consensus politics, a set of policies and laws that alternatively can be called neoliberalism/neoconservatism, corporatism, or cronyism. Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter/Movement for Black Lives, the anti-fracking/fossil fuel infrastructure expansion movement, all these and more are instances of a popular revolt unseen in over a century. Or more precisely, 156 years.

We have entered into a period where the public is finally waking up and becoming ungovernable in a fashion akin to 1861-65, when we had this little fracas known as the Civil War. Now obviously there are some massive differences, including the fact that a separate republic has yet to form out of secessionist states. But in the same way that the governors of certain states jutted out their mutton-chopped chins to towards Washington and said NO so we have seen the public telling the powers-that-be to take a hike. Obviously the reason for this resistance is the absolute opposite from the motivation of the Confederacy, slavery, but in terms of the power dynamics, the people have become ungovernable. And because it is the absolute opposite of the Confederate motivation, we can actually applaud this. Rhode Island native Grace Lee Boggs said in the final years of her life We are the leaders we have been looking for, by which she meant we need no parties or politicians to tell us what to do. Instead we are the agents of our own destiny and can do far more than any elected official ever would.

If you doubt me, just look at Providence, which seems to be hosting every week some sort of protest, picket line, or demonstration on multiple days that wholeheartedly rejects an element of the consensus politics. This made itself on the national stage most recently in the case of the populist uprising that gravitated around the presidential campaigns of retro-New Dealer Bernie Sanders and retro-Dixiecrat Donald Trump.

The elites in the 1% have also caught onto this. And they are getting pretty nervous. As such they are trotting out an old strategy from their playbook of public manipulation tactics.

Just over seven decades ago, something like this also happened. The United States emerged from the ritualistic human sacrifice known as World War II as the only victor totally unscathed by the conflagration. While Berlin, London, Rome, and Tokyo were effectively nothing more that vast expanses populated with bloody piles of rubble, the American home front was host to sprawling metropolises that were peopled by an extremely civically-engaged, patriotic, and progressive-leaning white voter base living in the northern half of the United States. What is forgotten about World War II is how, at a time when the AFL, the CIO, and the Communist Party USA all demanded their members abide by a near-sacred wartime no-strike pledge, the country was host to hundreds of unauthorized, illegal wildcat strikes. This was when the government and press were able to say without a hint of hyperbole in their inflection that If you walk off the job, Hitler will win the war! Simultaneously gays, women, and Blacks began to organize into a cohesive element agitating for civil rights.

So what did the ruling elites do?

The Democrats started a false panic about Russia.

Harry Truman got the ball rolling with his loyalty oaths and purging federal employment of Communist subversives while blaming domestic protests on Joseph Stalin rather than Democratic Party mistreatment of progressives and minorities they allied themselves with. Sen. Susan Collins has already begun this sort of discussion again by having Dr. Eugene Rumer testify on March 30 that Occupy Wall Street was supported by Russian media, saying that It's a perfect example in that Occupy Wall Street was a genuine movement on the Left. But it certainly serves the interests of Russian propaganda to play it up as a major challenge, as something representing a major fault line in our society. because, you know, it drives the message that the United States is in decline, that the United States is in crisis, it plays up to audiences at home in Russia and abroad, that the United States is not the perfect society, something that they really like to emphasize. So that's -- that's -- that's an excellent example. And I think it deserves the attention that you -- the spotlight that you cast on it It's blown out of all proportions. And as you know, the best propaganda is that which has a grain of truth to it. Heaven forbid that the ruling elites actually admit how awfully they treat the 99% via austerity policies!

Then a raving lunatic named Joe McCarthy recognized he could make big headlines out of this stuff. Accusations of espionage and subversion leveled against a minor third party of progressives, the Communists, snowballed into accusations against the entirety of the Democratic Party. Indeed, as documented by Susan Jacoby in her book Alger Hiss and the Battle for History, the political discourse as framed by the Republicans continues today to carry antecedents that go back to the Red Scare. Right wing ideologues funded by the Koch brothers still say that Social Security, school desegregation, and other elements of the welfare state that come out of the New Deal and LBJs Great Society were in reality Communist plots.

This is all pertinent because it has now been revealed in the new book Shattered: Inside Hillary Clintons Doomed Campaign that this whole notion of Russia hacking the election was in fact merely a talking point manufactured hours after the end of the most bizarre 24 months in American history. Since last November the Democrats aligned with the Clinton machine have been pumping out through their lackeys in the press reams of absolute nonsense about Vladimir Putin and Russia that directly mimics the major talking points from the McCarthy years.

Now, did Russian-owned media, such as RT and Sputnik Radio, publish pro-Trump stories during the election? Yes, and this is because they have no principles and will support any politician who says they oppose saber-rattling towards the Kremlin. RT and Sputnik acted the same way most recently with Marine Le Pen because she was opposed to the forces which have been steadily and without warrant encircling the Russian border with heavy artillery pointed directly at Moscow over the past 20 years. But then again the Daily Worker, the news venue also getting cash from the Kremlin, would endorse FDR during an election, does such endorsement mean he was a stooge of Joseph Stalin? And does this indicate more than anything else how progressives have so substantially abandoned opposition to war that such anxieties find expression only in the anti-interventionist/isolationist right? Over the past eight years the anti-war movement locally has been reduced to low ranks from its peak over a decade ago at the start of the Iraq war.

Quite obviously there are certainly plenty of qualms to raise about Putin and the Russian government he leads. As a queer man I have a significant feeling of solidarity with LGBTQQIA+ folks in Russia who are subjected to state violence stemming from laws that target same-sex attracted people. But I also am forced to wonder whether these local liberal/progressives would be raising this sort of stink about the connections of a President Hillary Clinton and that veritable oasis of feminism known as Saudi Arabia. At this point multiple news agencies and reporters, including my current editor at Washington Babylon, Ken Silverstein, have pointed out in serious muckraking venues that the Clinton Foundations ties with the House of Saud were quite substantial and were going to seriously impact American foreign policy in the Middle East regardless of domestic protests to the contrary.

As for the firing of James Comey, I shed not a single tear for the man who unleashed militarized goons on the protesters at Standing Rock and created from whole cloth the fantasy of a War on Cops. Local progressives who mourn his martyrdom are unwittingly saying therefore that Comeys COINTELPRO-styled espionage against American political protesters was part of a great career they wish to restore. Donald Trump is a nasty narcissistic white nationalist whose own bluster, blunder, and diet of Big Macs perhaps will either cause his ejection from office before 2020 or compel him to follow the lead of LBJ and limit himself to a single term. If there were devious items related to Trumps business connections with Russia, why only now and not in the past 36 months has this become an issue? Trumps garish and galling graft is simply so sloppy and saucy that he truly merits the respect shown anyone doing stand-up on amateur night at the Apollo.

Hillary Clintons foundation, by contrast, remains a galling hive of the most wretched malfeasance. Julian Assange told John Pilger in a November interview:

JOHN PILGER: In terms of the foreign policy of the United States, thats where the emails are most revealing, where they show the direct connection between Hillary Clinton and the foundation of jihadism, of ISIL, in the Middle East. Can you talk about how the emails demonstrate the connection between those who are meant to be fighting the jihadists of ISIL, are actually those who have helped create it.

JULIAN ASSANGE: Theres an early 2014 email from Hillary Clinton, not so long after she left the State Department, to her campaign manager John Podesta that states ISIL is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Now this is the most significant email in the whole collection, and perhaps because Saudi and Qatari money is spread all over the Clinton Foundation. Even the U.S. government agrees that some Saudi figures have been supporting ISIL, or ISIS. But the dodge has always been that, well its just some rogue Princes, using their cut of the oil money to do whatever they like, but actually the government disapproves. But that email says that no, it is the governments of Saudi and Qatar that have been funding ISIS Libya, more than anyone elses war, was Hillary Clintons war. Barak Obama initially opposed it. Who was the person championing it? Hillary Clinton. Thats documented throughout her emails. She had put her favoured agent, Sidney Blumenthal, on to that; theres more than 1700 emails out of the thirty three thousand Hillary Clinton emails that weve published, just about Libya. Its not that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use in her run-up to the general election for President. So in late 2011 there is an internal document called the Libya Tick Tock that was produced for Hillary Clinton, and its the chronological description of how she was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state, which resulted in around 40,000 deaths within Libya; jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in, leading to the European refugee and migrant crisis. Not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people fleeing Syria, the destabilisation of other African countries as a result of arms flows, but the Libyan state itselfwas no longer able to control the movement of people through it. Libya faces along to the Mediterranean and had been effectively the cork in the bottle of Africa. So all problems, economic problems and civil war in Africa previously people fleeing those problems didnt end up in Europe because Libya policed the Mediterranean. That was said explicitly at the time, back in early 2011 by Gaddafi: What do these Europeans think theyre doing, trying to bomb and destroy the Libyan State? Theres going to be floods of migrants out of Africa and jihadists into Europe, and this is exactly what happened.

Say what you will about Putin, the plain fact is that Moscow does not publicly stone and behead women for things as offensive as atheism, witchcraft, adultery, and homosexuality as these Clinton Foundation clients do. Lets just put those things into perspective while we are on the topic of foreign entanglements, business connections, and political corruption stemming from it. This Putin-phobia is senseless and dangerous for several reasons.

We are trotting down a very well-worn and repeatedly rotten-resulting road here. I say that we should get off this path and stay ungovernable. The Democrats are entirely and solely responsible for the election of Donald Trump. We should never forgive them this as long as they live. We should not allow ourselves to be played for fools by a manipulative and deceptive media industry with a faux-progressive sheen that aligns with these Democrats and promotes militarism and war with Russia in the name of distraction from their own wrongdoing. Lets instead given them the misery they deserve. A century ago, a certain Democratic Socialist said in an interview that one must be as radical as reality itself.

Lets do it.

Email to a friend Permalink

See more here:
Guest MINDSETTER Stewart: Local Progressives Aiming Gun at Own Foot, Will They Pull Trigger? - GoLocalProv

Progressives are blowing 2018 by dedicating too many resources to Russia story – Daily Kos

Nothing in the Russiastory will improve the personal economies of working-class Americans. It will not give them good health care. It will not rebuild infrastructure to provide jobs. It will not educate our children. So while working-class America continuesto suffer from subpar wages, while they continue to see their health carecosts rise,they hear a narrative that's anathema to their reality. The liberal intelligentsia, the Democratic establishment,is concentrating on a subject that will do absolutely nothing to make their lives better while at the same time giving President Charlatan an excuse for his inability to accomplish anything for the working class.

No one is asking that we ignore the Russiastory. In fact, taking it off of the front burner as folks build a substantive,evidence-based case would be much more effective. Think of how impactful a breaking story would bebut one thatis well-developed,where the Trump family's financial entanglements and collusion with Russia emerge with clarity.It would be much more effective than the daily Russian repetitiousness which causes everyonebut the political junkiesto switch to the Food Network,Discovery Channel, ESPN, or some other station to break said monotony.

So what should the progressive intelligentsiaexpend its resources on?Education, for startersbutin a manner that is palatable to working-class America. Trumps three mostdisruptive policiesTrumpcare, tax cuts, and immigrationcan be tied into a perfect economic narrative that exposes Republicans for the charlatans that they are.

Instead of spending time repeating the same old Russiastory, journalists should go to every industrialized country and do reports aboutreal people interacting with their health care systems, illustrating pricing and outcomes. Go to highly-taxed industrialized countries and talk to working-class people who can describe the social benefits they receive from their government. Do the mathematical analysis that showswhen Americans include their insurance costs,child care expenses, elderly care costs,and other expensesabsorbed by the state, how much more efficient it is than some invisible source capturing some unearned profit. The shortage of farm workers created by Trump's xenophobic stance will ensure higher prices for our produce and other farm goods.

Most of us in the progressive intelligentsiaknow there is a fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats, since the lattertruly believe in the Democratic platform.The problem is that we are governed within a thin center that minimizes the differences, somany in the working class see a convergence into the establishmentwithlittle distinction between the parties.

Many of us are hesitant to engage those who chose Trump, simplybecause we know how flawed they are. A few weeks ago Iwrote the following, and I hope manymore willheed it.

Many Americans are racists. Some are homophobes. Too many are sexists. A growing number are xenophobic. Misogyny still reigns. Americans are humans with all the frailty humanity brings. We will not fix these defect within our lifetime.

We can break the backs of the Republicans if we stop striving towardan unachievable purity and insteadworkon economic, health, and other commonalities while refusing to allow our human defects to stopall progress. It can be done.

Here is an aside that liberalsshould note: Ivebeen to many Netroots conventionsand a couple of tea partyconferences. This black Caribbean Latino with a Panamanian accent was treated better at the tea partyconference than at Netroots when outside of my Daily Kos clique.In fact, I wrote about oneshocking experience at Netroots Nation 2015 that is worth a read.

Yes, of course thetea partywas likely trying to make a point with me, but that is my point. Like them, we can suppress our bad urges when we want to accomplish agoal.

Liberals will do well to read the Politico piece titled "Why Liberals Arent as Tolerant as They Think,which may open the eyes of those willing to self-examine. It's something we can work on within our local progressive groups.

If we progressivesdon't change our game now, we willhave squandered the opportunity to take over the House and the Senate in 2018 and the White Housein 2020. Republicans care less about losing Trump than we do. They will be happy with President Pence and the semblance of a Republican ultra-conservativerebirth.

And so far, theyresellinga bad product much better than we are able to sell a good one.

Continued here:
Progressives are blowing 2018 by dedicating too many resources to Russia story - Daily Kos

How did political progressives think they were Anabaptists? – Mennonite World Review

Let me tell you the story about how many politically progressive Christians came to think they were Anabaptists. (Im mainly talking about post-evangelical progressives rather than traditional mainline progressives.)

To recap, Ive made the argument that many progressive Christians believe they are Anabaptists when, in fact, they are Niebuhrians. This truth was exposed with the election of Donald Trump. The rise of Trump has politically energized progressive Christians in ways that are hard to reconcile with Anabaptist theology and practice. Again, this is no judgment of Anabaptist theology or of all the political activism of progressive Christians. Not at all. This is just a description of the disjoint between political theology and political praxis.

Most progressive Christians want to be politically engaged. Very much so. Especially with Donald Trump in office. But Anabaptist theology doesnt provide great theological scaffolding for much of that political activism. Thus my advice: Seek out and embrace a political theology that provides better theological support. To my eye, I think that theology is Reinhold Niebuhrs Christian realism.

But that raises a different question. Why did so many progressive Christians come to embrace Anabaptist theology in the first place?

Thats the story I want to tell you.

The story starts in 2003, with George W. Bush and the invasion of Iraq. Many progressive Christians mobilized against that war. At the time, social media was just exploding. Blogging was in its Golden Age. Twitter would show up in 2006, just in time for the 2007-2008 Presidential campaign where we debated the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, torture and Guantanamo Bay.

As these debates raged on social media, Anabaptist theology, with its criticisms of nationalism and war, became a powerful theological tool in the hands of progressive Christians to level indictments at the Bush administration.

In addition, emergent and post-evangelical expressions of Christianity were going strong. Many disaffected and disillusioned evangelicals were looking around for theological positions that critiqued how evangelicalism had been co-opted by politics. With its strong criticisms of Constantinianism, Anabaptist theology also fit that bill.

And so it was during these years that many progressive Christians, in using Anabaptist theology so effectively to critique the Bush administration and the politicization of evangelicalism, convinced themselves that they were Anabaptists.

But they werent Anabaptists, not really.

Why werent progressives Anabaptists? Two reasons.

First, theres more to Anabaptist theology than its peace witness. Anabaptist theology also espouses a robust ecclesiology, the church as the locus of life and political witness. This aspect of Anabaptist theology doesnt sit well with many progressive Christians, who would rather work as political activists than invest in the daily life of a local church. To be sure, many post-evangelical progressive Christians harbor nostalgia for the local church, memories of hymn sings, youth camps, vacation Bible school and pot luck casseroles. But at the end of the day, progressive Christians tend to think calling Congress, community organizing and marching in protests are the best ways to make the kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven.

Second, the robust ecclesiology of Anabaptist thought and practice works with a strong church-vs.-world distinction. This contrast has been famously captured by Stanley Hauerwas: The first task of the church is not to make the world more just but to make the world the world. In Anabaptist thought the church is set apart from the world, its goal to be a witness to the Powers by making a stark contrast between the kingdom of God and Babylon.

That negative view of the world has never sat well with progressives, who, being liberals, tend to have a very favorable view of the world, a view which sits behind their very open, inclusive, cosmopolitan, non-judgmental social ethic. Progressives want to embrace the world, they dont want to create a community that highlights the darkness and depravity of the world. For many post-evangelical progressives, a negative view of the world smacks of the judgmentalism they are fleeing from.

In short: During the Bush years, progressives used parts of Anabaptist theology to great effect. Progressive Christians denounced the evils of war, empire, nationalism and Constantinian Christianity. Progressive Christians were so effective in this critique that they started to think they actually were Anabaptists. But progressive Christians never really were Anabaptists. They were post-evangelicals who became Democrats.

Richard Beck is professor and department chair of psychology at Abilene Christian University. He is the author ofUnclean: Meditations on Purity, Hospitality and Mortality.Richards area of interest be it research, writing or blogging is on the interface of Christian theology and psychology, with a particular focus on how existential issues affect Christian belief and practice. He blogs atExperimental Theology, where this post originally appeared.

Excerpt from:
How did political progressives think they were Anabaptists? - Mennonite World Review