i must admit that i know next to nothing ab political outlook of hispanics and blacks.
but judging for the fact that nader ran to give them health care, etc.,and they overwhelmingly voted against their own interest, i can’t see who these people solidfy with?

You come on here with the go around talking trash about a “left” and now you’re hoping by conjuring up my heritage you’ll create an artificial distinction between Shabnam and my positions.

When all this seems just too much for you to absorb, you bring in Zionism. This is exactly what the power elite have done to fire up the fury of racism. Your one crazy codger, DB. You’ve no clue andyour arguments are based on baiting not on logic or reason or facts.

My positions are consistent and long running. You’re zionist administration is now in power. Is that not enough for your guys (Rev. Wise, and DB)?

I agree that the lack of solidarity with communities of color is a huge reason a more powerful “Left” has not emerged in the US. Given that there are many and huge obstacles in place to prevent the emergence of a Left (Taft-Hartley to hinder unionizing, “Zionist” strawmen arguments to keep Jews–historically among the most impassioned defenders of Left ideology of all kinds–from staying with “us”, arrogant and simplistic arguments that serve to increase distrust against Blacks, a distinct lack of understanding about the history and role Latinos play and have played on the Left, etc.) it´s no wonder. But where the rubber meets the road is in the attempts we make–we here–to overcome our own obstacles and work together.

Do any of you here know each other? Are any of you members of a union? Do any of you here have Black or Latino friends? What is your relationship to women like and are they part of the calculating when you assume you speak for the “Left”? Do you think you can speak for women? Why are there no women here? Does this bother you? In what circumstances do you associate with people who are not well-educated, articulate members of the same Left groups or groupings? Do any of you know who the mayor is in your city and how many times have you taken an issue to her/him that has you so impassioned here? Have any of you worked in soup kitchens, homeless shelters, volunteer groups run buy organizations like churches in order to understand firsthand what these groups do and why? Have any of you attended a church service and witnessed the solidarity between people there and used that solidarity to perhaps get on a speaker´s list to address them with your concerns? Have any of you done more than spend time behind computer screens screaming at each other? Who are all of you? Are you students? Do you have jobs and have you organized a union in your workplace or contacted a progressive union to help you?

It is the answers to these questions that determine the effectiveness of your “Left” committments.

My article was about Iceland. Its homogeneity makes some aspects of organizing easier here than in the heterogenous US. But in many ways it is also harder given the often “in-family” nature of disagreements between Icelanders. That they overcame these obstacles to be right now–as I type–almost ready to topple their government should be the issue we discuss. Not whether Zionism is an obstacle or how disconnected most USAmericans are (and most sadly among so-called Leftists) to communities of color. People have historically given their lives for others when they are in solidarity with those “others”. And while we can all safely say that the military is an instrument of war and imperialism, it is among the many hued “communities” of soldiers that daily racism is overcome (sexism remains an intractable issue there) The point is when circular firing squads begin, everybody gets shot. “Solidarity” means absolutely nothing if it is only with the few thousand “Leftists” in the US who regualrly spend more time talking to each other than in reaching out to explain to others what it is we bellieve in and why. And when people reject those explanations we don´t go away sulking, calling them stupid or in need of re-education. We get back to work.

We have much too much work to do and I won´t be led astray by silly attacks against me personally or by attempts to convince me of Zionist power centers and their tight hold over all things. I am not that stupid or disempowered. I would suggest people read Gene Sharp or even Saul Alinsky and start meeting people you would never in this circumstance–or perhaps under any circumstance–meet otherwise. Read MLK, Jr´s “Why We Can´t Wait”. Read Gandhi, Fannie Lou Hamer, Cesar Chavez, anybody, shoot watch “Matewan”, but for Pete´s sake stop assuming you know what solidarity means. Learn from people who organized in the past and how they succeeded (and note how often–and why–they failed) Then make friends and bring together people. That will go a long way towards establishing your own credibility beyond the comments boards of a few Left websites.

You guys are way too smart to be doing this shit.
Best,
José

It´s because this whole Obama stuff has become a crutch to not discuss what are “we” going to do to get what “we” want. Part of my longer post was to try to get such out of people and no one has still respnded to that. No one. Fine. But to keep harping on Wise (who I still agree with, by the way) and “deadbeat” is to fall into the very trap of electoral focusing and elite manipulation you all decry.

The Reverend is asking the question that I have raised during the entire election season. Before asking the question of what “we” are going to do you have to understand where “we” are coming from. The problems as I see it with the Left has been its inability to build solidarity. The Obama campaign exposed many of the contradictions that exist on the Left. The inability of the Left to provide a coherent and cohesive alternative is a major reason for the angst and visceral reaction among leftists to the Obama campaign. It is this visceral reaction and the lack of NUANCED analysis has split the Left and if the Left doesn’t exercise a reasoned response that will only leave it further marginalized and alienated.

A reasoned response does not mean no criticism of Obama but it does mean coming to terms with the failures of the Left and understanding why the Obama campaign generated so much energy especially among people of color. The importance of this analysis is so that the Left can create strategies so that it can build solidarity with people of color. It is especially important if the Left hopes to increase it ranks.

I make a distinction however between Shabnam’s response and that of Max Shields whose elitism is a major reason why he will find it difficult to build solidarity with people of color.

Shabnam’s understandably is angry that people of color would “betray” their moral stance to vote for a Zionist politician like Obama. Obama, in his eyes, is the enemy of his people. The problem however and WHY NUANCE IS IMPORTANT is that Obama the politicians ran against a Republican party that has maintain its power using White Supremacist tactics for the past 30 years. This is what people of color responded to. The problem is that people like Max Shields and many others on the Left (see the review of Petras new book by Kim Petersen) has used their “moral authority” to OBSCURE the nature of U.S. Zionism as yet another form of WHITE SUPREMACY. Such obscurity prevents people of color from confronting Zionism as they do White Supremacy. Such obscurity interferes with the possibility of constructing vital solidarity among Muslims and Arabs with Blacks and Latinos in the U.S.

To prove my case in point, notice the “pious” outrage from Max Shields toward the Reverand with his following remark…

This and so much more and you have the gall, the superficial gall, to say you think this was a form of justice for the prejudice shown to you as a man of color, a Puerto Rican man of color!?!

Max who has often argued that Zionism is NOT an issue in the United States fells that he has the “moral” high ground to scold the Reverend, a man of color, who takes some pride in the Obama victory in the context of the long linage of political inclusion in the United States.

Yet Max who is white and I’ll assume is Jewish has NO such lineage nor does he demonstrate in his scolding of the Reverend, any affinity of the struggle for political inclusion in the United States. Such a stance demonstrates his lack of NUANCE and his DUPLICITY. His remarks to this man of color clearly illustrates WHY the Left is UNABLE to build up its ranks and why solidarity on the Left is so RETARDED among people of color and especially among the MOST LOYAL voting bloc of the Democratic Party — African Americans.

Without that understanding and without that analysis you can forget about any REAL and SERIOUS challenge to Barack Obama coming from the Left. And if the Left fails here you can easily foresee that there will be no outlet to corral the energized mass that voted for Obama and without any alternatives those that become disillusioned will stay home and yet another opportunity by the Left will be lost just like it was in 2004.

IMO the only bright spot I saw in 2008 coming from the Left was Rosa Clemente. She did an excellent job articulating the distinctions between her campaign with Cynthia McKinney and that of Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzales. And while many writers on the Left consistently wrote “Nader/McKinney” as alternative to Obama they glossed over their distinctions. You see ELECTORAL politics did matter on the Left because rather than honestly debate those distinction between Nader and McKinney many on the Left (especially white Leftists) once again tried to obscure those distinctions. Clemente in her appearance on Democracy Now surprised Matt Gonzales, when answering Juan Gonzales, excellent question to draw out those distinctions.

Clearly if the Green Party is SERIOUS about focusing on issues that are key to communities of color it is possible that the Green Party may be able to position themselves to attract black and brown people over to their side especially when Obama disregards issues vital to communities of color.

The problem however with the Green Party is that there is still structural problems and as the Reverend himself alluded to in a previous post that easily led to the party to be sabotaged in 2004. If the Green Party can prevent such future sabotaging as well as to seriously build solidarity with communities of color and especially make a serious challenge to Zionism which will be an extremely BOLD move not only will it purge the Trojans on the Left but IMO build the kind of SOLIDARITY that the Left needs to build with communities of color especially as the demographics of the United States move in this direction.

I appreciate the Reverend asking the question of what the Left needs to do going forward. The answer is simple — build solidarity with communities of color.

There was a “science” and it is called “eugenics”. Bozh there is no “science”. It is simply called White Supremacy and it has been an ongoing struggle for the past 400 years in North America. It is the reason why Obama garnered 95% of the African American vote and 87% of the Latino vote. This is what you need to analyze and understand before solidarity can be built with African Americans and Latinos.

The point you continue to miss is that a man of color can be the most cynical of choices when his mission is aligned with the imperial empire.

To rejoice that the power elite have selected through heavy endorsements a DLC candidate, is the ultimate in cynicism. To rejoice at that is a significant failure in understanding US history, and the imperial empire that has been here since the beginning.

If this was just a passing fancy, this rejoicing, then, perhaps it could be excused, but my sense is you’re not interested in real change. You are taken in by the illusion of change as it is dressed up by the plutocracy that runs and divides this country and the world.

It is important to call out this love of illusion for what it is. Yours is not simply a personal “prejudice” made good by a POTUS who happens to be of color. What do you think you have in common with Obama? If you are Puerto Rican, I would suggest almost nothing.

Let’s face these facts for what they are. African Americans had a instinctual reaction to Obama – this has been the same reaction they’ve had in Chicago. It is a doubtfulness, a sense that he represents, not a black heritage, but an elite one. This is not because he grew up in wealth, after all his heritage is white. His father was barely in his life. It is all that has shaped him, the choices and why he decided this vs that. Has he shown courage over self-interest? If so when?

It is a distraction, at best, to look at Obama as a triumph over racism or empire, even to a small extent. African Americans have voted Democrat. To feel, as some do, a sense of comfort in the appearance that looks like “them” has nothing to do, ultimately, the direction he has already indicated he will represent. The signs are more than there. He is not an anti-war president, he is not for a fair and just resolve for the Palestinians, he is ready and willing to attack, premptively, any number of weaker nations, and on and on. He is putting a cabinet together who have a long history of supporting the American empire. Their economic policies are to bailout the Plutocracy. It is still “trickle down”. Obama has even indicated that he admired Ronald Reagan.

He will not doubt through a symbol here (close down Gitmo) and there; but the major decisions will always be to keep the Plutocracy happily in control. This is evident in his personal history – where his action, not his rhetoric – has demonstrated this.

This and so much more and you have the gall, the superficial gall, to say you think this was a form of justice for the prejudice shown to you as a man of color, a Puerto Rican man of color!?!

I realize now why the sidetrack made me single your post out (since you said you don´t mind!) It´s because this whole Obama stuff has become a crutch to not discuss what are “we” going to do to get what “we” want. Part of my longer post was to try to get such out of people and no one has still respnded to that. No one. Fine. But to keep harping on Wise (who I still agree with, by the way) and “deadbeat” is to fall into the very trap of electoral focusing and elite manipulation you all decry. Look, I am a “man of colr” and as such I am psyched to see a Black man named Barack Obama as POTUS. I felt tremendous joy at the huge change in the US that has occured since I was born (1959). My family were discriminated against and I suffered innumerable slights because my family are dark-skinned Puertoricans. And we suffered class discrimination, as well. So this was a small victory for me and I felt it and enjoyed it. And then I moved on…

“We” can celebrate the significant advance in the US to allow this to happen (and in my opinion to not recognize the legitimate joy is to reveal what many call a elitist, white privilege) but by no means should “we” stop doing what we should be doing. Organizing. Building bridges. That´s the job of those of us who understand the long term view of history.

If the bridges between the three of you are so insurmountable and you all write here at DV, what do you think the obstacles will be when you want to expand “our” base and you talk to a soldier, or a Christian, or a union worker, or some apolitical person for whom the incredible knowledge and wit you possess grants you an opening?

I appreciate the sidetrack and understand your point. I disagree with it however, and still would ask you (all) to consider the other points I mentioned re: the all-male commentaries, the “not talking to…” list, etc. And no, you don´t need to answer me–we all need to answer history. I made a decision many years ago that I needed to look myself in the mirror and say I worked to help people, who are the objects of my concern, not ideology, even mine.

What I have seen in Iceland is inspiring but they did it by looking at each other (and believe me, they are a tough people with many differences of opinion) and working to overcome those differences. Are you?
Best,
José

Their clear allegiance is to the plutocracy, the financial markets, the 1% blood suckers.

As we hear Obama’s yet to be spoken inaruguaral speech, I’m reminded of the 2000 one from George W. Bush. Pledging his administration would embody, “a new commitment to live out our nation’s promise through civility, courage, compassion, and character” and cahllenged Americans to become engaged in the nation’s civic life. He further pledged that in foreign affairs the United States would “show purpose without arrogance…Civility,” he said, “is not a tactic or a sentiment. It is the determined choice of trust over cynicism, of community over chaos.”

The words of George W. Bush before his administration to its course stocked with neocons and neoliberals. One can only wonder how far Obama’s language will stray from his speech. We’ve already witnessed much of that lofty language dissipate under the the onslaught of his sponsors.

You are right. My comment did not directly target your article rather it was a response to few comments made earlier including yours.It is interesting, however, to see you not questioning other posts which were not related to your article but choosing to question mine. I don’t mind. In any case, my intention was not to be a provocateur, if I was I appologize. However, my 4:35pm comment was made to express my disagreement with some of the comments made earlier including yours. The post @ 3:50pm reads:
“Max, I brought up Wise because I think he is right about a number of things, namely the extent to which marginaliziation becomes a badge of honor worn by armchair warriors (or Internet warriors) of the USAmerican Left. Deadbeats´ main contention (as I read it), that “the white left does not have any real solidarity with people of color” is I think, fairly accurate there.”
What does it mean? What does a “real solidarity” with people of color mean? Deadbeat has written earlier that Afrian American are loyal to democrats. They have voted for Clinton family more than once. Why? It is true that ‘the left’ has mainly been under the influence of white middle class and upper middle class not only in the US but in other countries as well, yet this can not be held the only reason for lack of ‘real solidarily’ between white left and people of color.
People are searching for individual and group interest. Why African-American elite do TRUST white establishment and are willing to help them to expand ‘white culture’ into other communities yet people of color from the lower rank can not compromise to do the same and strike a real solitarity with white left ? As Deadbeat has written, we have to expose those who divide us, black or white. To me Tim Wise is one of them who tries to get support for Obama where his selections and actions encourage mistrust and breaks our solidarity because he represents the status que and worse. Obama has invited those who support, terrorism, Hindu extremism, Zionism and expansion of ‘ war on terror.’ He said very little during his campaign and has modified some of his earlier statements to fit his image of ‘empire’. Thus, people try to expose him through their writing and other means of communication to help others, including people of color, not to be silent against the new administration’s plicies and do not give him the support he needs to expand the empire of terror. This is an important process to bring down walls of mistrust to build a real solitarity among disillusioned people for a better world. We know individuals such as ‘Tim Wise’ and his ‘message’ should not be trusted because it does not break the wall of mistrust between us rather it forces us into a BOX by supporting Obama and his vision for the empire, which is hidden in his ‘American leadership’ statement towards ‘world government.’

‘Tim Wise’ and his ‘message’ should not be trusted because it has no contribution except divisiveness to force us into a BOX. The Zionists have many options. Choice of Zmag to target progressives is interesting:
http://911review.com/denial/imgs/left_gatekeepers.gif

The former rules from the top and leads followers. Coalitions between the leadership of empire models is much easier because they package communications for follower consumption; and they negotiate the alliance at the top, not at the constituency level.

I think the Deadbeats, et al, would like to see the “left” use the organizaing principles of empire. Doing so completely defeats the purpose of the democratic transformation that is most needed. Using the methods of empire simply replaces one empire with another, regardless the stands on issues.

This is fundamentally why Parties as we know them cannot produce real change. In order to survive in empire, as it is, an entity follows the rules of empire. So, when the AFL-CIO formed it did so using the empire organizing priniciple. They lead their flock rather than the other way around. By institutionalizing the “workers’ movement” they eliminated the “movement” and created a shell of the energy that created the workers’ movement. This was done to civil rights and other real movements. Those aligned with empire survive.

We need a real people’s movement which continues to challenge at the local level. If you move beyond the local you enter the realm of top down plutocracy. Creating such a movement is much more challenging than the old tried and true empire model.

A real movement doesn’t happen because poor people are given an alternative to “vote for”. It is poor people or people of color or progressives who together must make the movement. We must get up off of our asses and make it happen. This is not about spoon feeding. Empire spoon feeds and is happy to keep us watching tv, and drooling over our McDonald’s foodless burgers.

I would only say that in his response to Deadbeat (which is like beating a dead horse) he has thoroughly provided the ludicrousness of DB’s arguments which seem more half thought through with a primary motiveto provoke.

Blaming a “left” over and over and over and over, does nothing to advance the discussion and the actions which are imperative. In fact, DB’s arguments are detractors. He uses Obama and African Americans as shields against a real discussion about a way forward. He has no intention of providing a real vision, because a new way forward is not his intention.

Shabnam, my only minor quarrel with your response to Deadbeat is that there were at least two other choices – McKinney and Nader. Many State ballots had as many as 8 or 9 candidates for POTUS. Obviously they were not at the debates, they were not on the news cycles, they did not have hundreds of millions of marketing dollars to spend on the “campaign”; so in a sense they’re “choices” were limited by a blackout these alternatives. Again, I understand your point.

We have a lot of work to do. First, is education and reconnecting people every day to the very choices we have or need and how to make those reality.

Bashing “leftist” is simply an ugly sport. Racism was created by the power elite to separate us, not by the “left”. We are naturally brothers with the same mission and enemy. So, let’s stop playing the “race police” game.