Comments on: A Challenge for Candidate Palin

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:27:20 +0000

Numemberg could also be seen as “Victor’s Justice”. I think you are terribly confusing accountability with responsibility and reactionary “blame the victim” rhetoric.

As Public Enemy asks…

“Who’s the criminal?”

By: rosemarie jackowski

rosemarie jackowski — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:19:53 +0000

The complete exoneration and separation of the individual from his acts could lead to total chaos and make the planet even less livable than it already is.

It is not blaming the victim – in a sence- we are all victims.

I am simply holding people responsible for their deeds. “‘The dog ate my homework”‘ does not apply when there are millions of dead bodies. Anybody here remember Nuremberg?

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:15:29 +0000

Sorry about that. I meant to write “Mr. Dawson”.

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:14:26 +0000

Ms. Jackowski says…

Deadbeat….The ad hominem comment was in the 2nd paragraph.

The comment by Mr. Kenny I agree was harsh, but the intent of his remark was accurate. Your articles are terribly REACTIONARY because they engage squarely in “blame-the-victim” rhetoric rather providing readers with an UNDERSTANDING of the forces that lead people to vote against their interest.

I can understand your FRUSTRATION with voters. However I fully agree with bozhidar recent remarks as he aptly identifies the problems with your commentary.

Ironically rosemarie, the side effect of your expressed perspectives does more to obscure the Left’s role in weakening your candidate — Ralph Nader — who I fully supported and voted for in 2004.

Without obscuring the Left’s role in weakening both Nader and the anti-war movement from 4 years ago you cannot not honestly blame the voters for voting for Obama this year. Your arguments ring hallow because the Left bears RESPONSIBILITY for leaving the voting public with no real choice or challenge to Obama and the Democrats.

By: Rich Griffin

Rich Griffin — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:18:45 +0000

We do what we can when we can the best we can. We have conversations, in person, on line, through media (esp. alternative medias). We take care of ourselves so we can do the necessary work. We find it infuriating that all we do is so SLOW and painful, but we do it anyway.

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:11:33 +0000

rosemarie,
i can’t see how personal responsibility can exist to the fullest or any degree without well developed collective responsibility.
collectively/individually, US is killing children. now for me to exercise my responsibility in connection to that fact i wld have to at least stand on corner every day holding a placcard condemning this act.
or even better i shld go on hunger strike till death if necessary.
but i have a wife. she may object. what do i do now? where goeth my responsibility to my wife if die?
what if i resort to terrorism? do i fulfil my responsibility by killing people or damaging property?
we are swimming in one genetic pool. am i responsible for advocating that we also swim in one health care, jurisprudence, education pool?
wld i not be irresponsible if i did advocate all that and neglected my own life and family by standing daily all dayon street corner and shouting about need for universal rights.
i say when we have so much collective crime, the criminals wld love to see us fulfill individual duties which may be defined by the criminals selves.
but, most important, what is or rather what shld one do in trillions of happenings?
wld it not been determined by all of us? we are dealing with aspects of reality in which everything is connected with everything else; thus one can’t separate one responsibility from the other. thank u

By: louis vitali

louis vitali — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 21:58:19 +0000

i am a green. we should be pouring every penny we have into electing someone or two or three to the senate.

By: rosemarie jackowski

rosemarie jackowski — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:18:08 +0000

Deadbeat….The ad hominem comment was in the 2nd paragraph.

My view is different from yours because I believe that individuals are responsible for their own actions. I don’t trivialize the influence of culture and institutiuons. We can also debate the old philosophical arguement of free will vs determinism, but it is counterproductive to totally exhonerate and separate the individual from his acts.

The 3 main points of the article are
1 Uninformed voters should be discouraged from voting
2 The media is partly responsible for the dumbing-down of the voter
3 The Party system, which prohibits any but Repub/dems from participating in the debates, is a major issue

By: Rich Griffin

Rich Griffin — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 06:09:07 +0000

I’m registered green because I agree with the policy positions of the party. However, I am less and less enamored with the party as a result of their disorganization, their inability to really help those of us on the ground willing to do the necessary volunteer work, and their constant bickering. I don’t blame Nader one bit. But most of the greens troubles really have to do with a lack of money. A large majority of greens are not money-based individuals and don’t have the money to give in our corporate elections. However, with all this said, they are still BETTER than Democrats and deserve our support. If I had two votes I’d vote for both McKinney and Nader. My hope is that between the two of them they get 10% or more of the vote – that’s 1 out of 10 voters!! This would be true leverage, saying to Democrats you must start listening to us and start enacting a progressive agenda! If you don’t support us we won’t support you anymore.

By: rust

rust — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:54:53 +0000

“— because both Parties have sold out to the insurance industry.”

Sold out is right!

By: Jerry D. Rose

Jerry D. Rose — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 01:33:52 +0000

The plot has of course thickened since this article and the comments in this thread were entered: the whole soap opera-ish “whose baby is this” issue raised (by a Daily Kos blogger among others) about Palin’s 5 month old down’s syndrome baby, the “evidence” that Palin was never pregnant with the baby and that it was in fact the baby of her teenage daughter. When you tune in tomorrow to As the Campaign Turns (an hour or two later in fact), you get the Palins releasing the information that this daughter is pregnant at a stage precluding her having given birth 5 months ago.

This episode seems to second Jackowski’s observation that the Palin choice has made Democrats very nervous and seemingly willing to unsheath their long knives (the Daily Kos blog was reprinted in Alter Net, a remarkably consistent Obama-supporting website). Of course Obama condemned the use of such smear tactics. Years ago I wrote an article called “The Division of Moral Labor” indicating the many situations in which higher-ups keep their hands “clean” by having underlings to do their dirty work; and this is precisely the “work” to be done in a campaign in which the electorate is so uninformed and apolitical that it actually gives a damn about whether, for example, that Palin baby is Sarah’s son or grandson.

By: Hue Longer

Hue Longer — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:02:10 +0000

where’s the mescaline?

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:36:44 +0000

Ms. Jackowski says…

[Michael Dawson's] view that ‘the little people’ need to be excused is disrespectful of them. … The point that I tried to make was that there is an individual responsibility for each voter.

I actually agree with Mr. Dawson remarks and I don’t see his comments as an necessarily as an ad hominem attack. Mr Dawson remarks exposes what’s missing from Ms. Jackowski’s analysis and exemplifies a real problem with reactionary commentary coming from the “Left”.

Ms. Jackowski’s analysis is missing is WHY people are voting against their interest. Another interesting question is WHY has the Left failed to attract these people. Another interesting question is WHY the Left failed to coalesce around Nader in 2004 which would have put him in a stronger position to reach the people that Ms. Jackowski implies are “irresponsible”. Another interesting question is why the Left has failed to confront Zionism. Confronting such a huge issue may make better candidates of both Nader and Obama. Another interesting question to add is why the Left is so fractionalized and disorganized and not committed to outreach. Another interesting question is WHY the left allowed the anti-war movement to become marginalized.

The point is that the side that Ms. Jackowski represent goes without analysis and it is very easy to BLAME the “individual” rather than to turn the lens to your own side and provide critical analysis.

Interestingly Ralph Nader himself is not shy to provide critical analysis of the Left. Here’s Ralph when asked why he didn’t run as a Green…

Because [The Green Party is] just too disorganized. They can’t—they can’t put it together. They bicker a lot, and they drive out a lot of good Greens who want to focus on agendas. I wish them well. I wish Cynthia McKinney well.

Clearly working class conscientiousness is weak to almost non-existent and there is a long way to go before the working class acts like a class. However to engage in “blame the voter” rhetoric when the Left needs to get its own house in order make such “blame-the-victim” rhetoric seem pious and arrogant.

The place to start is cleaning up one’s own house and that means taking a hard look at what is wrong with the Left and debating how the Left should repair itself so that it can proceed forward. And IMO that job is so immense that it won’t happen in time for the 2008 election.

Clearly, the Left lacks any kind of institutional organization and structures that it had during the 1930’s. The abandonment and sabotage of Nader by the Left in 2004 means that now Nader himself lacks any real institutional framework that will remain cohesive after the 2008 election. Right now the Greens as Nader himself remarked is too disorganized and they have not addressed their internal structual problems that allowed it to be infiltrated by left-wing phonies like Medea Benjamin and David Cobb.

Until the Left constructs strong institutions or can coalesce disparate groups then people will continue to vote pragmatically for the “lesser evil”. Therefore such “blame the victim” rhetoric is counterproductive and becomes rhetoric that essentially obscure the real problems.

By: rosemarie jackowski

rosemarie jackowski — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:28:38 +0000

Michael…Thanks for the comment. I will take your ad hominem comment under consideration. You might be interested to know that the last time I was in a college, I was an invited guest speaker in a class on Anarchy.

Your view that ‘the little people’ need to be excused is disrespectful of them. Everyone is accountable for their own actions. I agree that the powerful have a big advantage and a higher responsibility, if for example they control the media. The point that I tried to make was that there is an individual responsibility for each voter.

By: Michael Dawson

Michael Dawson — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:50:19 +0000

Another scary endorsement by Rosemarie of blaming the little people for the crimes of the rich and powerful. This is terrorist-style thinking.

Rosemarie, does your local community college offer any sociology courses? Try one. There are these things called institutions and power.

By: rosemarie jackowski

rosemarie jackowski — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:31:58 +0000

Rich…Thanks for the comments. ABC is reporting that the Repubs received 10 million in donations in less than 3 days because of Palin. One of the reasons behind this article is the fact that so many dems are very upset about Palin. The E-mails are flooding the e-space.

bozhidar… Thanks. I agree.

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 18:05:06 +0000

i suggest we expect much less change; else we’ll be disapponted.
that nader is running, is to me an astouding change for the better.
it’s a tiny step. and now that we have a nascent second party in US, let’s stop all talk about religion/politics.
we can talk about health care and the need to prevent future warfare, i hope.
constitution is a dead piece of paper; meaningful-meaningless and forever such.
constitution i assert doesn’t mean; people mean. and people who control WH, cia, senate, congress, army, money mean.
and the meanings are not in words; especially not in verbal ‘brilliancies’ that most amers are in awe of.
thank u

By: Rich Griffin

Rich Griffin — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:45:36 +0000

Great article!!!

How do we convince more and more americans to join us in rejecting the Republicans and Democrats? How do we get more independents, greens, progressives into all levels of government? I wish I knew the answers! Until then, I’m content to continue to be part of the 5-8% who vote for progressive alternatives, and vow to never vote for any candidate with a “D” after their name ever again (I’ve never voted for an “R”!)

My best friend went to high school with Sarah Heath (a.k.a. Sarah Palin). She was part of the “in crowd” then and remains so to this day. She will become vice-president beginning January 20th of next year. It’s only going to take 3-4% persuadables to make this a sure thing. The fact that we have a statistical dead heat AFTER the democratic convention! It always amazes me that Democrats believe they can continue to the same thing every single time and somehow get different results!! Insane!!