Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Electoral Politics Page 11 of 30

Hope Is Bullshit

By

On November 18, 2019

Comments

by Shepard Fairey

I am unintersted in “hope.”

Or as we called it in the Obama bullshit years, Hopium.

Hope is not a plan. Hope is bullshit.

Luck is real, but you don’t count on luck other than in the sense that the harder you work, and the more things you do, the more likely you are to “get lucky.” But luck is usually the odds coming in, and bad luck is as real as good.

In term of climate change, there is no reason for hope. It’s going to be bad and, in almost all cases, signature events are happening sooner than expected: We’re losing Greenlandian, Arctic, and Antarctic ice sooner than expected. We’re getting artic methane releases 70 years ahead of schedule. Every time an event comes in, it’s sooner or worse than the models predicted.

This is because of how systems work when they leave bounds–because they tend to accelerate, we can expect this sort of thing to continue. It’s going to get worse, sooner.

That’s the “luck” we’ve made. We’ve put half the greenhouse gases in human history into the atmosphere in the past 30 years, which is to say, after the time when we knew for a fact we were cutting our own throats.

Obama ran on hope in another sense, and created an economy which did nothing (and worse than nothing) for African Americans and which was shit for somewhere between 80 percent to 95 percent of the population. His signature health care plan was garbage, and in his period the price of various drugs rose to historical heights. He tripled the rate of drone murders over Bush (Trump has ramped them up even further), and so on.

He was human garbage, a man who bailed out bankers and then helped them steal people’s houses with fraudulent paperwork, then had his attorney-general immunize them with fines worth less than what they stole.

But this man is worshiped by many Democrats, because, hey, he was only human garbage, and Trump is a shambling mound of garbage (but has yet, note, to start any new wars, though he’s been happy to keep Obama and Bush’s wars going).

Oh, and because he was black, and that mattered more, to many people, than the fact he was human garbage.

Obama’s done very well since he left office, making lots of speeches and millions of dollars. Bankers have been very grateful and have shown their gratitude–just as they did for Bill Clinton (another mound of garbage, who cut welfare to hurt the weakest in the US, killed Iraqis with his sanctions that included medicines, and instituted judicial “reforms” which swelled America’s prison population while ending financial regulations intended to avoid financial collapses).

None of these people ever intended to do the right thing, and if you listened carefully you knew that. The best you could hope is that they were the lesser evil: a smaller mound of garbage than their opponents.

In the Democratic primaries, there was always a better option and that option was never chosen, because most Democrats are bad people who want Reaganism with a side of “but we don’t really mean it.”

Nothing is going to get better until we, whichever we we belong to, start choosing better leaders, whether presidential, or more local. Those leaders must want to actually do “good.” Yes, good. You know, taking care of the hungry and the sick, and not burying single payer and the public option like Obama did. (Yes, yes he did, and he wound up passing the OCA without Republicans anyways. He made a choice, and his choice was evil.)

Or perhaps taking care of poor people, including blacks. Or not allowing pirates in suits to gouge people on drug prices, or perhaps *gasp* not vastly expanding fracking, which is what Obama did and bragged about, even as he signed the Paris Accords, knowing he had no intention of honoring them.

Nor did virtually anyone else who signed them, of course, and anyone who thought otherwise is either a fool or on the payroll.

Mounds of garbage. Merkel, Blair, Cameron, Trudeau, Harper, your country’s leader, odds are. People who have always wanted to do as much evil as they could, and as little good as they could get away with. (Remember nothing happened to Greece Angela Merkel was not okay with–and all so German banks could be bailed out indirectly. It would have been embarrassing to just blatantly bail them out. So a lot of Greeks died and suffered.)

There is no “hope” as long as our leaders are people like this. None.

Don’t get hooked on hopium.

We need to elect leaders who want to do as much good as they can, and as little evil as possible. Sanders in the US, Corbyn in Britain.

But we don’t want those leaders, not as a whole, do we?

We’ve been offered them, we have a chance to elect them.

But will we?

Because they have plans, and those plans are to do good.

That’s the only hope you’ve got.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

There Are No Good Billionaires (Bill Gates Edition)

By

On November 7, 2019

Comments

So, Elizabeth Warren has a two percent wealth tax plan with three percent on people with more than a billion dollars. She’s suggested raising the over a billion percentage to six percent… And Bill Gates says….

I’m all for super-progressive tax systems,” he said. “I’ve paid over $10 billion in taxes. I’ve paid more than anyone in taxes. If I had to pay $20 billion, it’s fine.

“But when you say I should pay $100 billion, then I’m starting to do a little math about what I have left over,” he added. “You really want the incentive system to be there without threatening that.”

Mr. Gates is the second-richest person in the world, according to Forbes magazine, with a net worth of $106.2bn.

Well, of course, she didn’t say that, she said six percent. A little over six billion in the first year. Bill’s 64, and of course, the actual nominal amount will decrease each year unless he can grow his money faster than six percent, in which case, what’s the problem?

Elizabeth Warren

He’ll never, ever be anything less than a multi-billionaire, in other words. His bullshit about 100 billion is just that, fear-mongering bullshit.

And if he’s paid ten billion on 106 billion, well his tax rate was about ten percent. Most middle class families would love to have that low a tax rate. (Yes, I know it’s on income, not wealth, but the point is he obviously paid very low income taxes. Which, actually, is what the data shows–the middle and working classes pay a higher percentage than the rich.)

Bill, of course, is the “good” billionaire.” But he’s the guy who gave straight-up fascist Modi a reward. He’s the guy who spent millions to change the educational system in the US, then admitted that the model he successfully pushed doesn’t actually work. He’s the guy who used brutal, monopolistic practices to build Microsoft.

And he doesn’t want to pay a six percent wealth tax that will be used to provide universal healthcare.

Billionaires are bad, and, as an even more radical and willing-to-take-on-billionaires candidate, Bernie Sanders, said, they shouldn’t even exist.

As for Billy, he thinks he deserves to be one of the richest people in the world because he created the Wintel monopoly and crushed rivals with practices which were, under black-letter law, illegal.

But one can understand why he might prefer a Republican president. After all, it was George Bush, Jr. who withdrew the anti-trust suit which would have broken up Microsoft and left Bill worth a lot less than a 106 billion dollars.

Trump, of course, massively dropped tax rates on the rich.

Money comes first, ethics come second. Bill’s always understood that.

Republicans have been pretty good to Bill. Performative wokeism and his good image aren’t worth a six percent wealth tax. As for people without healthcare, welll, better they die than he pay taxes which would leave him a multi-billionaire for the rest of his life.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Tlaib Endorse Sanders

By

On October 17, 2019

Comments

AOC

I find it interesting that many centrists are angered and surprised. They thought these three, arguably the most progressive members of the House caucus, would endorse Warren.

Certainly, by recent standards Warren is progressive and left-leaning, but she’s weak sauce compared to Sanders.

But centrists thought because she was a woman, AOC, Tlaib, and Omar would endorse her.

I’m glad to see this shift away from identity as primary. Of course, Sanders is Jewish, though no one seems to care, but they don’t care in large part because he doesn’t make a deal out of it at all. Sanders is for everyone. Some people need more help, and he wants to give it them.

And that’s what true left-wingers want. Identity can’t, and shouldn’t be ignored, because the world doesn’t ignore it, but almost everyone needs help at some point, and everyone should have a good life, and it’s good politics to talk to everyone.

Despite all the talking points about Bernie Bros, Sanders support has always actually been more female than male, and more ethnic than white. This shouldn’t be a surprise, because economic populism, combined with specific policies to help non-white males, will help them a ton.

A final note: If Warren wins the nomination, I’ll endorse her, and happily, even though I prefer Sanders. But, I do remember that she didn’t endorse Sanders in 2016 when her endorsement might have mattered in Massachusetts. These three young politicians have shown an integrity and bravery she didn’t. I’ve seen quite a few threats about how AOC (in particular) will pay a price. I’m sure Warren understood that in 2016, and thus decided to lay low.

Real allies don’t do that, and it’s one thing which has made me uneasy about Warren ever since.

AOC, Tlaib, and Omar, on the other hand, continue to earn trust. They say what they mean, and they stand up.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Bernie’s Heart Problems

By

On October 3, 2019

Comments

Bernie Sanders

So, Sanders had to go to the hospital and have a stent put in.

Sounds bad, but apparently it’s fairly common to be healthy and live for many years afterwards.

I’m unsure of the political impact of this. Certainly it could mean the end of his chances at the presidency.

Nonetheless, if he decides to continue, assuming his released medical records indicate his health is good, Bernie will continue to be my preferred candidate in the race.

What this does indicate is what was always true given Sanders’ age: Who his VP is matters a great deal and that VP cannot be chosen for “balance” but must be someone who shares Sanders’ politics, because the chance they’ll wind up as President is higher than normal.

The obvious person, should Sanders win the nomination, is Warren, but there are other possibilities.

In the meantime, I hope Sanders recovers well and quickly.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Brief Notes on the Democratic Primaries

By

On September 13, 2019

Comments

Bernie Sanders

The polling is all over the place, but generally Biden is in first place, with Sanders or Warren in second. In early primary states, it’s generally Biden, but only slightly ahead of Sanders.

The clear truth about Biden is that he’s senile and gaffe-prone. Even if you like his politics (which, obviously, I don’t), this is the case. He’ll be a bad candidate in the general–I think Trump will eat him alive. Yes, Trump is senile also, but Trump is channeling some genuine anger and hatred, whereas Biden is channeling his elite entitlement, along with “Can’t we go back to Obama?” My suspicion is that the first wins.

As for Sanders and Warren, whichever one isn’t doing well in the early primary rounds had better drop out fast and endorse the other, otherwise it’ll be Biden.

All that said, who the hell knows? Things change and perhaps one of Biden’s senior moments will get through to people and they’ll realize that he’s no longer all there.

I prefer Sanders over Warren. Warren wants to save capitalism, she’s been very clear on that. Markets aren’t working well, and she wants to fix them. That’s her raison d’etre, that’s why she was a Republican most of her life, and why she switched her party to Democrat: Republicans were fucking up markets. She’s clearly said, for example, that she wouldn’t nationalize utilities, which is actually an extreme position among market disciples; many would say these are natural monopolies and should be owned by government.

This isn’t to say Sanders is anti-markets. He isn’t going to replace them or any such thing, he’s just a social democrat. He’ll modify them, make them more democratic, put more under public control, and so on.

He also seems the most credible on strongly tackling climate change. One might say that makes him a “must vote.”

As I’ve said before, I trust Sanders more. He’s been very consistent over the years, he’s not going to take oligarchs’ money even after the primary (Warren’s position), and he doesn’t think things were substantially “okay,” even in the 80s. (They weren’t, or we wouldn’t be here.) None of this is to say he’s perfect; he’s bad on some people’s key issues and not great on foreign affairs.

He’s still, in my opinion, better for ordinary people than anyone else, including Warren.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

A Rainbow Reading Out of Pete Buttigieg

By

On July 31, 2019

Comments

Hi. I’m the blogger/artist formerly known as Pachacutec. If you are old enough to remember me as a lefty blogger, you’ve been on this internet thing too long. But I digress.

My friend Ian saw me tweet something, and he asked me if I wanted to do a piece about it. Sure, why not? But I’m going to adopt a prose style that is quick and to the point, with a bit of punch, as an homage to my longtime friend Ian.

I tweeted in response to Congressman Patrick Murphy as he endorsed Peter Buttigieg for Congress. I’m sorry did I say Congress? That’s what mayors usually do, but this guy is running for president. Alrighty then.

Let’s start with Patrick Murphy. My other longtime friend (and gay hero in his own right), Howie Klein, once described Murphy as:

“the perfect Chuck Schumer recruit– a slimy Schumercrat as corrupt as they come. Yesterday we looked at how he’s been selling his vote for campaign cash in regard to EB-5 visas, something I thought only real low-life Republicans did. Oh… that’s right; Murphy is a lifelong low-life Republican and just switched his party registration to get into Congress (where he votes with the GOP anyway).”

From that perspective, the endorsement of Mayor Pete makes perfect sense. But Mayor Pete is getting a fair amount of recognition for being a gay candidate. People who know me know me know that I’m a big old homo. And now with my tiara firmly in place, I’m here to call out Mayor Pete.

Okay, I don’t actually wear a tiara. I’m actually very much like Pete in my gay origins, in that I am a light-skinned person, presumed to be white (though I’m half Latino) with a good education, cis gendered, and a beneficiary of all the presumptions of competence and intelligence that accrue to light-skinned, well-educated men who are not effeminate in their conduct or manner.

Like Mayor Pete, I came out later in life, in my young 30s. That was a pretty traumatic time for me, actually. I made a fair mess of my life, and we won’t get into all that. But as Ian’s readers know, it’s what you do with your suffering that makes or breaks you. If you dive into it and learn from it, with the right support and process, you can turn it into your superpower.

Or you can become a preening, pompous, head-up-his-ass climber who cashes the cultural, social and political checks earned for work done by all the very homos, queers, transgender men and women, and people of color that you personally avoid engaging at all costs.

Everyone in the gay community knows these people. These are the white boys who stand and model, painfully preppy, in bars filled with other white boys, with a few token “ethnics” like black, Asian, or Latino men sprinkled in to provide a little variety, a little sexy “grit” and fetish fodder. Their Grindr profiles say things like “No offense, but I prefer white guys,” or “no fats or fems.”

These are cis gay white boys who might stay for the drag show and enjoy the bawdy jokes, but who feel painfully uncomfortable around effeminate men. As in my tweet, they don’t even see women, non-binary gender rebels, or black folk. Mayor Pete’s relationships with black folk in South Bend are a joke. Gay guys like Mayor Pete never go into a bar if the person of color ratio gets too high–say, higher than 15 percent, unless, for example, they really have a thing for Latin guys and it’s salsa night at the club. Some of these guys really fetishize some groups, be they Asians, black men, or Latinos. It gets very creepy.

I don’t want to belabor the point. This guy has no claim to stand for gay politics when he is precisely the kind of guy who wouldn’t have been caught dead anywhere near the Stonewall Inn, and lacks the self-awareness to know it or understand why. I personally know the type, because, in the beginning of my coming out journey, I had to overcome the legacy of cultural biases, blind spots, and presumptions of privilege (I know Ian hates that word, sorry) that would have made me into one of those guys.

For some people, the experience of coming out, and the experience of being marginalized or oppressed in some fashion, leads to expanded empathy and curiosity for others who are downtrodden or outcast. That’s clearly not Mayor Pete. Pete fundamentally believes in his inherent superiority, and subsequently wants to have it both ways: He wants people to overlook his gayness because he’s not that gay, and then he wants credit for being some kind of LGBTQ pioneer. But whether you look at his policies, his politics, or his presence in a room with real people, he is what he is: A conservative, wannabe frat boy who happens to be gay. No wonder Patrick Murphy loves this guy.

Hard pass. If you want more specifically on Pete from the great Howie Klein, I’ve got you covered.

Coda:

Scenarios for America’s Political Future

By

On July 16, 2019

Comments

Big Brother Award

Let’s run through the most likely possible victories in the upcoming federal election and consider what they mean for the US’s future.

Put them in four baskets:

Trump wins. He does more bad stuff, the situation continues to get worse, American post-WWII-style multilateral hegemony and trade order takes huge hits.

Biden or Harris win. Harris will be a more effective President, but both will be neoliberals. More Obama/Clinton style politics. I very much doubt that Harris, who was a brutal prosecutor, will turn out to keep many progressive promises if elected. Both of these people perpetuate the conditions which created the possibility of a Trump worse.

Sanders wins. An actual left-wing President. He may have issues with Congress, but there is a lot that can be done by the aggressive use of executive power. Sanders is who says he is, he’s been that guy, with some updating for modern identity politics since the 60s and 70. He hasn’t changed, he can be trusted.

Warren wins. Don’t expect to get real universal healthcare, she’s talked out of both sides of her mouth on the issue too much. But she’ll be good on a lot of other issues.

Both Sanders and Warren will probably be good on the environment. None of the others who are likely win will be (and if you think they will…)

There are two important, longer-term issues at play here: (1) A real, right-wing totalitarian who seeks to end American democracy is the first (I maintain that Trump is not this man, largely because he is not organized enough), and;

(2) The environment. With permafrost melts happening 70 years ahead of schedule, we are out of time. Steps–aggressive steps–need to be taken now, and they aren’t being taken.

So let’s play this out a bit longer. Say Harris or Biden wins. The next chance to get a good President then becomes 2028 because there will be no primary challenge in 2024. So domestically, the situation will get worse (and better for a right-wing, totalitarian demagogue). Nothing of significance will be done about the environment.

Potentially catastrophic on both fronts.

What if Trump wins? Well, there’s another chance to have a decent president in 2024. That’s not good, and he’ll do damage in the meantime, but there is a schedule here with regards to climate change. As for a totalitarian demagogue (someone who sees what Trump did, combines it with Bannon’s politics, and is disciplined and charismatic), well, the risk is there, but odds are the next President will be a Democrat.

As for Sanders or Warren, well, they’ll be reelected if they deliver and won’t if they don’t. So it’ll be war, because Republicans will know that. But it’s always war with Republicans, so whatever.

I am not arguing, “Don’t vote for Harris or Biden.” I am pointing out the foreseeable consequences of certain electoral outcomes.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Polling at this Time in 2015

By

On June 28, 2019

Comments

Found this tweet, thought it was important enough to share:


Now I wouldn’t go as far as DeRosa: There probably were a few people who got it right, but the larger point is that polls have a good chance of changing a lot over time.

In the 2008 Democratic primary, things went back and forth a lot. Even once the field had been thinned, it wasn’t obviously Obama for a while.

None of this is to say that Biden doesn’t have the best odds, just that he’s by no means a sure thing.

Page 11 of 30

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén