Time flash back to 2000. An idealistic college student stares at a 4 am delusional Peter Jennings, who is begging for coffee after having been on the air literally all night covering a crazy election. She goes to bed, thinking, “It probably doesn’t matter that much, anyway. Bush is an idiot, how bad could he be? Gore’s a nothing, so it’d just be more of the same–no change for the better.”
Flash forward 7 years. A much more cynical office worker stares at the BBC headlines, and has the urge to scream at the top of her lungs as she reflects back on the past seven years, winding up at that image of Peter Jennings on the televison seven years ago.
This is what is going through my head as I read the headline.
WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY? We allowed a future war criminal to steal an election from future nobel peace prize winner.* What the hell. We should have done whatever it took to make the original election results stick. We should have asked hard questions about how the second cousin of one of the candidates wound up in a position to call states. We should have counted all the goddamn chads. And when Bush defeated Kerry, we should have looked hard at Ohio. We should have questioned Diebold. We are where we are because we accept corruption without questioning.
As much as I hate to say it, I kind of agree with Thomas Friedman’s point in one of his latest editorials. Now, technically I’m older than the people he’s describing. I’ve never seen the point of MySpace or Facebook. I have enough real friends; I don’t need 300 imaginary ones to sort-of-kind-of know. I agree that politics online is not as effective as politics in real life. What we do here is a starting point, not an end point.
I would like everyone reading this to make a commitment with me–to go to the next political event that excites them. Take an active part. Go to a debate. Go to a protest. Because I, for one, don’t entirely buy into the YouTube debate. There is a mediated distance created through such an event that makes us into individuals, rather than a force for change. Eliminate the distance. Your physical presence says much more than this blog post ever will. The only way to get through to the people who make decisions in this country is to bring it to them. It also helps us to remember that we are not alone. It was so energizing and heartening to see the 500,000+ people who protested with me against the Republican National Convention in New York City. We need that energy back if we hope to change anything, and the only way to really do it is to come together.
If we are unwilling or think it’s too much trouble, perhaps we deserve what we get. This finger is for me, for not getting physically involved more.
*And don’t even tell me about how George W. Bush has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Anyone can be nominated–hell, I could be nominated. If you took that nomination seriously, you are the world’s biggest idiot.
I like you.
2000 was the first election I got to vote in. I voted, but didn’t really care who won. Like you, I just figured things would stay the same.
Never in a million years did I think 2007 would be the prequel to 1984.
I’ve flown to Washington DC and protested and have gone to smaller protests in my own area, and it felt good to to so. But it didn’t make a damn bit of difference. The way I see it, we have 15 months to impeach Bush and stop the madness before a terrible precedent is set for all future Presidents. We will spend the next 50 years working our asses off just to get back parts of the rights we had just 7 years ago. If we ever get any of them back at all.
The only people that can impeach Bush and Cheney (and the rest of them) are our current members of Congress. 2008 is too late.
I would hope that the blogosphere, and the anti-war groups, and everyone that wants the wars and destruction of the Constitution to stop, would join together and put enormous pressure on Congress with this one goal.
All good roads lead through impeachment.
Pass it on
Dude, I was at the RNC protest too! So rude to not say hi to your future blogger colleague who you didn’t know at the time during the rally.
I am hurt.
I disagree that it doesn’t make a bit of difference to protest. I don’t think the point of the protest is necessarily to convince George Bush not to bomb something. It is essential for change, but change is slow going. If it makes people not involved with the protest rethink things, then it has served a purpose. There’s more than one target at a successful protest–the person who hasn’t really thought about the issue. In today’s society, I think that’s a great many people.
I also want it on record that a sizable number of Americans disagree vehemently with the current administration and policies.
Torteya–I think I did see you! I’ve marked you in the photo here. Seriously, though–maybe we should have a Finger contingent at the next NYC protest. Although, I also want to go to hear the presidential candidates. Except Guiliani–I know what that little power hungry weenie has to say at this point.
By the way, that day was one of the hottest I’ve ever spent in NYC. Being out there at ~105 walking for hours was really exhausting. The Sun clearly has a conservative bias!
I’m not sure why’d you waste your efforts trying to impeach a president. I kind of consider that censure.
While I may think they are idiots and have no business running a country. I can also accept that I might be wrong. Meaning what I believe to be the best course of action may not be so.
I really do miss the days where people could discuss issues without polorizing them. It’s why protest at the RNC always make me chucle. Wouldn’t it be more productive to rally at the DNC (or what ever flavor of politics you like?).
A contrarian point of view while nice needs it’s own fundation or it fails. The contract on america kind of proved that. While I may have disagreed with most of it’s tenants, I can agree that it was probably the only “visionary” concept put out there. It’s not easy to change policies when the best people come up with is “I disagree! and I’m angry!”.
I also have a theory that in 2026 Al Gore won’t look so smart and that human generated CO2 emissions have little to nothing to do with global climate change. This is the scientist in me speaking and I could probably go on a 30 page rant about how world ocean basins are warming and that the current line of thought is so flawed as to make it seem like mideval desntistry.
Archimedian, I think you’re making a great many assumptions about what has been said previously.
Impeachment–of course it’s censure. Impeachment is the tool provided by the Constitution to remove the President in the event that it becomes necessary. Impeachment CAN be a waste if it’s for something trivial (like a blowjob) or it CAN be used for its purpose (misuse of federal agencies and funds to spy on your “enemies”). If you’re mixing it up with “censor”, well, that’s not right. If an impeachment leads to the removal of the President, it’s more akin to the CEO of a company being removed by the Board of Trustees. There’s nothing about censorship, it’s about being bad at what you’re doing, and needing to save the company.
I thought we were discussing issues here without polarizng them? My point in the initial post was that we don’t contribute as much as we think we do just through the act of blogging. There were some very general suggestions–debate, protest, but no party affiliation or policies were espoused along with that suggestion. I did describe the kind that I have attended, and what I got out of them, so as to illustrate my point. You can go to whatever kind of event you want, or sit at home and chuckle merrily at the thought.
I am not a contrarian, I’m not sure where this is coming from. I find the idea of a contraian offensive. A contrarian is someone who goes against whatever is popular just because it is popular. I seriously doubt that anyone who has so far posted to this thread is a contrarian. I can only guess that you assume that because someone protests, they must be a contrarian. Yes, the act of protest necessarily includes taking a contrary position to those in power. However, most people only protest issues that matter deeply to them, not out of some urge to “disagree” or “be angry”. If I am going to go out in 100+ weather to express my opinion, it is one that hold very deeply, not just a “Gee, I want to disagree with someone today” whim. I’m not sure what the Contract for America has to do with anything. My point in protesting the RNC was simple. There was no larger “visionary” goal for me. I had a lot of problems with the RNC in NYC: The RNC was using NYC only because they could raise the jingoistic flag of 9/11. I disagreed with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I disagreed with their economic policies. I disagreed with their environmental policies. This was a chance to register that along with a lot of other people that agreed with me. For building alternatives, I attended meetings of Howard Dean’s organization, Democracy for America, and a few Green Party events. I didn’t have a “magic bullet” solution and I may have been wrong, but at least I was participating in the discussion actively.
With the Al Gore comment, you’re missing the forest for the trees. The larger point is not about Al Gore in particular or George Bush in particular; it’s about what we accept as a nation without question. If you disagree with Al Gore and global warming, do something about it other than blog about it. There are plenty of organizations out there that would probably love to have your help.
“You can go to whatever kind of event you want, or sit at home and chuckle merrily at the thought.”
This is probably the disconnect between our points of view. In 1984 I worked for both the republican and democratic parties (I know shocking to actually work for both, any ways) in voter registration drives. Primarily because I did not at that time espouse a particular political belief. They do supply registrant lists so you can easily go door to door and talk people into becoming an active part of the process. This is something I have done every presidential election year for going on now…shockingly enough 23 years.
Any ways, as time has gone on I have found that political activism where thoughts are expressed in a negative way get lots of headlines but accomplish little. It’s understandable that if in a representative democracy you feel you are not being represented to want change. Immediate at that. I’m just not seeing impeachment as the “removal of a CEO”. I understand why you’d want new leadership but that is why you have this election process every four years. We could debate the use of impeachment as a conceptual way for the “electoral revolution” that happens every four years. I just completely disagree with the point you are trying to make. Remove the decision from the hands of the “people” and I think it’s beyond a dangerous road to travel.
Finally, ” If you disagree with Al Gore and global warming, do something about it other than blog about it.”
I wont reciprocate the patronizing tone here since I think this is actually a conceptually valuable discussion. Suffice it to say that Al Gore is dicussing climate change (global warming being the flavor this decade) but more to the point the interaction points that affect it. I believe as more than a few people do that what he wishes to change will have absolutely no impact on the gloval climate because it’s just plain flawed, now it will have geo-political impact (which I can get behind but I hate backing an issue which is hiding it’s true purpose). So while I might be writing on a blog about this the assumption you are making is that I am taking no action. Not sure where that assumption comes from? Perhaps that I think being a contrarian at rallies is not the best use of your time(meaning protesting the RNC as opposed to say attending Green Pary events or Democracy for american events)? Any ways we’ll leave it at this, if I have been actively involved in getting people registered to vote (and to vote as they please – Libertarian only!
) for the past 23 years, chances are that I might be, just might be doing more than blogging about environmental change. When I’m done with my next current project I might even blog about that and perhaps change your opinion of those who might disagree with you. That while I may think you are wasting your time (and it is yours to waste, I’m just giving you why I think it’s a waste of time) it does not mean that I like to waste mine by “sitting at home chuckling on my couch”.
<— Contrarian.
Though I prefer the better sounding term: Innate Skeptic and Devil’s Advocate Enthusiast