Saturday, March 19, 2011
Response to Dave Dubya 1
Dave, I've defended Mr. Obama on numerous occasions against these charges of Communism, extremism, etc. (just ask Linda and Silverfiddle). You want me to do it again? Fine, I'll do it again. Mr. Obama is a good and patriotic American whose views are WELL within the mainstream of American politics, and I CONDEMN anybody who doubts his commitment to his country. As to which of the two sides (the left or the right) is more vitriolic/hyperbolic, I really don't give a damn. I'm just responding to what I'm currently experiencing here (progressive bloggers referring to Republicans as fascists................................................................................................In Connecticut, if a person doesn't have a driver's licence, the state will issue that person a photo ID. And you need to show that photo ID in order to vote. The ID is good for 5-7 years and costs $22.50 (a fee that is waived in a great many hardship cases). This doesn't sound unreasonable to me. And, besides, how do you know who a person is without a photo ID?....................................................................................................As for the "union busting" accusation, let's just say that I'm not entirely comfortable with the term. I mean , yes, there are some Republican Midwestern Governors who've chosen to restrict the collective bargaining powers of public sector employees. But that's exactly what Jimmy Carter did in 1978 with the Federal workforce. And, besides, all of these workers can still organize, collect dues (no, not out of the paychecks anymore), and bargain over wages. That, and all of these Governors have done nothing about private sector unions. Hitler got rid of ALL unions......................................................................................................And what about me, Dave? I'm against collective bargaining for public sector employees. Am I a fascist? And what about, too, FDR, George Meany, and Mayor Laguardia. Were they all frigging fascists, too? I mean, come on.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I applaud your reasonable positions. I don’t think I’ve accused you of being nefarious or negative in any way. I thought I was simply adding relevant points to the topic. However, I can say with confidence that within the US population there are people who fit the fascist mold, just as there are admitted communists. The truth is most people accused of being one or the other are neither.
That said, what I am trying to get at is the incremental creep of totalitarianism in our country. It doesn’t happen overnight, and is not due to the influence of a charismatic leader. We see it occurring under Obama to the extent that he continues so much of the Bush Administration’s “dark side” of foreign and domestic policy. What we are experiencing is a growing institutionalized advance of totalitarian, anti-democratic tendencies. I correctly attribute these policies as fascistic. I’m not saying Obama or Bush is another Hitler. They both, however, employed fascistic extra-legal measures from Gitmo, to the FISA Amendment, to targeted assassinations without established guilt or conviction.
Much of this trend can be directly attributed to the “war no terror”, along with many earlier threats to our Bill of Rights emanating from the war on drugs. The founders warned us that a free democratic republic cannot survive a permanent state of war. Killing goat herders and bombing wedding parties does not make us safer and does not protect our freedom. Unending total war, along with a vast security state, tends to dissipate our freedoms more than they actually protect us from a few hundred terrorists. Fear and anger were the guiding emotions behind the Patriot Act and other reactive measures taken by the government. I would also add that it is fascistic of politicians to capitalize on such fear and anger. This is the cruel and manipulative side of the political animal.
People who voted last election will be denied that right in the next one. College students are also targets of this disenfranchisement. Workers are losing their voice in our so-called representative republic, while the economic elites use their vast wealth as an unlimited commodity of “free speech”. I hope you can see that collective bargaining rights are not the only rights we are losing in this country. Our grand experiment in liberal democracy is fading into something darker and ominous.
I suggest we all become familiar with the concept “inverted totalitarianism”, based on the book “Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism” by Sheldon Wolin.
Here’s a good review of the book.
http://www.alternet.org/news/85728/
On Sue's blog you said "they're about power/the protection of incompetence". Clearly you're talking about unions in general, and not just public sector unions.
So I think you can stop BSing us with this nonsense about FDR or Jimmy Carter agreeing with you.
How would I describe someone who's in favor of corporations having all the power and employees having none? I'd say that person is at least a little bit fascist.
BTW, you'll be happy to know that private sector unions ARE under assault as well. both recently submitted "Right to Work" legislation in the Senate and House respectively.
Dave, I'm against warrantless wiretapping, rendition, preemptive wars, the seemingly endless drone attacks, etc., etc.. But I've also never known fascists to so voluntarily relinquish power before. I mean, what in the hell is Bush doing now; fishing, globetrotting with 42?
You obviously didn't read my comment closely enough wd. I clearly said, "The public sector unions of Wisconsin", "these particular unions"......."Right to work" - that means that a person doesn't have to join a union if they really don't want to, right?
Will,
Luckily we still have a somewhat intact Constitution that mandated Bush/Cheney step down. You know they did consider "postponing" the '04 election. Those terror alerts came in handy as a political tool. This was even admitted later. And here we thought using fear as a political weapon was terrorism. That only applies to the other side, I guess. Have you noticed Bush, Rummy and Dick are NOT exactly indulging in care-free globetrotting? Bush canceled his trip to Switzerland due to outrage over his war crimes. You won't see these guys visiting the International Criminal Court in the Hague as tourists.
My point was elected officials can, and do, exhibit fascistic behavior. Did you check out "inverted totalitarianism"?
So it's ONLY the public sector unions in Wisconsin that are corrupt, about power, and protective of incompetent employees???! First of all, how did you come to that conclusion, and secondly, I don't buy it.
BTW bush did his part moving the Republican agenda forward. Obama hasn't rolled back the patriot act, completely pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan, ended military trials at Gitmo, or completely halted the outsourcing of torture, has he?
Just because bush isn't in office any longer doesn't mean he wasn't a fascist. The Citizen's United decision proves the Republican agenda is all about turning power over to the corporations.
Regarding your question about "Right to work" meaning "a person doesn't have to join a union if they really don't want to".
No, your interpretation is wrong.
"Right to work" is legislation championed by Republican which is meant to undermine unions. If employees vote for a union then there should be a union. That's the way democracy works. There's a vote and everyone abides by the results (even the ones who voted against).
I agree with you, Dave, that Presidents and other elected officials have indeed abused their power, Mr. Bush clearly being one of them. But (despite your strong case that Mr. Bush is the worst, most dictatorial, etc.), I still think that the wounds are way too raw and the proximity too close. As of now, I still have Lincoln, FDR, and Nixon as more dictatorial and Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, and Nixon as worst.......My point on fascists not leaving power is that the really evil ones generally overstep the law/these constitutional requirements. Bush obviously did not.
I've worked in state government, wd. The waste, duplication, inefficiency, ineptitude, and, yes, protection of incompetence, was incalculable. And, as I stated before, collective bargaining has cost the state of CT millions of dollars. So, I ask you, state government in Wisconsin would be appreciably better how?
So, what else are you willing to put up to a vote, wd?......So, a person who doesn't want to work in a union (maybe because that union has tried to harass him/her) HAS to work in a union.....or leave?......Oh well, at least you're willing to let the people vote on it now (didn't you say before that unions should be mandatory?).
"Bush obviously did not" overstep the law and Constitution? I'm dumbstruck.
Where to begin...It's far too late at night for this...
Will, your experience working in state government is what they call anecdotal. It doesn't prove that your experience is universal... you're even trying to transplant it to another state!
Unions don't "harass" workers, they represent them!
After bush was "elected", what if I had said I didn't want to live in a country where that guy was president? I think my only option would be to leave, would it not have been?
I think it would be a lot easier to find another job if you didn't want to be in the union, compared to emigrating to another country.
Dave Dubya said... "Bush obviously did not" overstep the law and Constitution? I'm dumbstruck.
Me too.
I was referring to the fact that he, Bush, ceded power and stepped down - that part of not overstepping the constitution; the fact that actual fascists like Hitler, Mussolini, etc. NEVER ceded power. That's what I was refering to.......Yes, wd, union chumps DO harras people. They do it routinely leading up to a vote. And that's why "card check" is such an idiotic idea (the fact that people sign those ridiculous cards just to get these imbeciles off of their backs).
Oh, I have a lot of "anecdotes", pal; countless trips on crappily paved roads, numerous nightmarish visits to the Department of Motor Vehicles, constantly having to see road crews singularly held up by their frigging shovels, etc.. Oh, and just for the record, not all workers deserve "representation". They deserve to be fired! And that's the problem with the unions. They treat hard workers and slackers the same and they often protect workers who, yes, DESERVE to be fired.
Oh, here's another "anecdote". We've had quite a few nursing homes in CT go out of business and pretty much all of them have been union facilities. Is that a coincidence, wd? Or is it more the fact that these unions make it so damned burdensome to do business that it puts these businesses under?......And a lot of these convalescent homes have actually gone on strike. Gone on strike!! I mean, how would you like it if the convalescent home that your loved one was in went on strike (people who probably already make more money than you)?
So the primary goal of a union (according to you) is to put the business the employees they represent work for out of business ASAP?
Doesn't that defeat their other goal of gaining and maintaing power?
Post a Comment