Looking Back But Moving Forward

A manifesto has come out of the gathering of the First Ecosocialist International held in Venezuela and attended by approximately 100 people. It is a bold and ambitious call for "recuperation" and "reclaiming" from an indigenous perspective, with an emphasis on a "return to our roots and our original ways".

Those of us from white settler culture can only participate in a project like this from a peripheral position. The guiding cosmovision is certainly anti-modern if not specifically per-modern and there is an emphasis on knowledge systems and language which is unaccessible to us privileged First Worlders with our secular, humanist traditions.

The problem is, these Indigenous ecosocialists are going to need our (so-called Developed World) help if they are serious about "reclaiming their ancestral lands". Because no modern white person is going to respect a claim for land based on how long the Natives lived there. The struggle against neo-colonialism will be different than the old decolonization. The manifesto focuses a great deal on culture and cultural/ethnic identity in the forms of food and hairstyle and interestingly, hip hop music. Here again, it is unclear how much European culture they are willing to assimilate into this "pluralist" vision or how it is to be decided.

Because culture is not static, not a fixed entity, but a process in constant flow and flux. And a romantic, overly nostalgic yearning can be problematic; a good example is the Islamist dream of a new Caliphate or Right-wing populist yearning for an innocent past that never was or the racist dream of an olden time of genetic purity. So there is no doubt a great deal of wisdom in tradition and great value in the indigenous cosmovision, but we aren't going back. It has to be incorporated into the new way of being.

Bumper Sticker Reflections

A fairly common bumper sticker up here reads: Love My Country- Fear My Government. It's usually associated with a redneck/libertarian "patriot" kind of attitude which means I Don't Mind Killing Ragheads for My Country but I Sure Hate Being Taxed by my Govment. In other words, not a super deep analysis of the role of the State- more jingoistic flag waving paranoia about The New World Order.

But it's not a bad slogan when you think about it. If by "country" you mean the landscape and physical features and by "government" you mean the gang of corrupt capitalist oligarchs that pull all the strings, yeah, I could put the sticker on the old blue car.

Unfortunately, patriotic "love my country" tends to mean disavow the history of racism and exploitation and genocide, it means embrace the mythologizing Hollywood story, the romantic epic of taming the wilderness and creating wealth. As for fearing your government: Definitely Be Very Very Afraid. Of THIS government. Doesn't mean governance is evil, just something you have to pay attention to.

Inequality

It is a commonplace that even though Occupy Wall Street didn't alter any fundamental social relations or power dynamics, at least it "opened people's eyes to the issue of inequality". I don't know how many times I have heard this speech delivered by those trying to salvage something from the experience.But in light of this recent tax legislation, so obviously skewed in favor of "The 1%", can we really cling to the notion of an awakening?

Obviously this concept of equality resonates in different ways for different people, just like the concept of fairness. The guy living in a trailer park -up to his eyeballs in debt, dead end job, etc..- who is celebrating the tax bill obviously didn't get the Occupy messaging about "greed" and inequality. He thinks inequality is a woman or black person getting preference in hiring or college admissions. He understands deep down, it is inscribed in his genes, that he is not equal to the 1%, that he could never go out to dinner with them, sit down and chat.

He can dream of having someone under him that he can boss around, helping him feel a little more equal to those above, and he can join the team of those that want to get government off their back, that want to shrink it till they can drown it, and taste a little equality in this closeness, this team spirit.

The fact is, Occupy preached to the choir, to those already on the team, who already saw the problem with unequal wealth and power. The other team thinks equality is just a sneaky way to take away liberty, the right to kick underlings around, the right to buy Hummers and yachts and shit when you finally win the lottery.

Adios Bill

"Progressive" icon and muckraking journalist Bill Moyers quietly announced his retirement yesterday, posting a few farewell words on his website about "protecting our fragile democracy." Bill had the kind of media exposure and bully pulpit a pundit can only dream about; PBS funding and Foundation funding and op-eds in any major publication he wanted. And after all those decades of influence- his life in the public sphere goes back to the Johnson administration of the early sixties- what is the state of "populist progressivism" now? How about the labor movement he so tirelessly championed? Those "Great Society" values he promoted?

Yeah. I know it is mean (and heretical) to criticize good old Bill after all his dedication and service but if "the humans" wish to see any kind of society in the next century, we need to take an honest look at what he was in service TO exactly. Unflinchingly. Along with other media stalwarts such as Robert Reich, Jim Hightower, Paul Krugman, Jeffrey Sachs, Eric Alterman, John Nichols, R. Mc Chesney, A. Bacevitch, Thom Hartman, the whole MSNBC crew, Moyers relentlessly pushed for a light social democratic program based on economic growth with a growing middle class and a caring welfare system for those less fortunate. He pushed for New Deal "re-distribution", basically a perpetual re-action against "conservatism" or economic "libertarianism" and even neo-liberalism, though that term was a bit far into the "ideological" deep end for most liberals to wade into. All these people carried water for the Democrats while gently scolding the Third Way craven fealty to Wall Street.

Basically, if Bill mentioned a critique of capitalism it was always qualified with an adjective, "crony" capitalism, "predatory" capitalism, "corporate" capitalism etc.. What he promoted instead was "capitalism with a human face" an American Sweden with strong unions and a tiny military and great schools and healthcare etc. etc. ... but something was always thwarting these idyllic policies...some strange human failing like greed, or corruption, or racism...or some nefarious force like FOX news or the Koch brothers or big corporations...or some bad decisions like Citizen United or Shock and Awe or drilling in the arctic. But capitalism could work for all if only it was a bit kinder and gentler. If only it was regulated, governed democratically, constitutionally, the new order could bring full employment and sustainable prosperity.

The dark side of this "progressive" program is the subtle way it excluded, even demonized, radical thought. By that I mean anti-capitalist. As the chosen gate-keepers, these progressives silenced dissent from the left using fear and ridicule; too utopian, too divisive, too dogmatic (maybe even totalitarian!) too unwilling to compromise and accommodate, too antagonistic. So take a look around and ask yourself, as Bill retires into the long twilight, how did that work out for you?

Getting Moody

From the NYTimes today: The credit rating agency known as Moodys (the one that didn't notice the housing bubble of the early 2000's) today says "governments must prepare for heatwaves, draught, flooding and coastal storm surges or face credit downgrades". They are under pressure to "address the underlying climate risks they face." Or else.

So you are a town on the Georgia coast and now you have to build a seawall that will withstand what? How "prepared" can you be for the climate in 2100? Especially if those same governments continue to prop up fossil fuel energy development. So the citizens (who hate taxes) will face higher taxes to build the absurd wall or face higher taxes because no one will insure their city. And face higher insurance rates no matter what they do.

How will they face the "underlying risk" of civilization collapse? How would I calculate that in terms of dollars and cents? As soon as Standard and Poor and Fitch (the other credit majors) start downgrading there is going to be some serious whining. Once the giant illusion of "preparedness" and "mitigation" and "addressing the underlying causes" starts to unravel, you will see a frantic exodus of rats jumping ship.

At the UN recently, Jeremy Corbyn of the British Labour Party said it is time to "factor the cost of environmental degradation into financial forecasting." That should be interesting.

Winning Back the Clueless Vote

In the winter issue of American Affairs, Nancy Fraser has a piece titled From Progressive Neoliberalism to Trump -and Beyond. In it she analyzes what she calls a "crisis of hegemony" as progressive neoliberalism, (think Reagan melting into Clinton) gives way to Trumps new America First populism.

Fraser argues that a new left-populism could win these voters back again with a truly progressive platform but one has to wonder about these voters who jump from Reagan to Clinton to Obama to Trump (and may have voted for Bush twice). If they are truly that clueless (and I believe they are), could they really be counted on to build a lasting, governing coalition? Won't they just sign on to the next dazzling grifter that promises them shiny toys? These are people who could never understand the article she wrote, or anything she has written. You would have to explain your platform through comic books. I think Fraser should face the difficult truth that American democracy if fatally broken and needs a total overhaul, not just realignment.

In the NY Times, Michelle Goldberg has a piece called No Wonder Young People Hate Capitalism. It is basically a thinly veiled warning that those in power are playing us too close, that if they don't wise up someone could lose their head. The case in point is of course the latest tax bill but if Goldberg were paying attention she might notice a few other areas where capitalism is failing, not just millenials, but the planet as a whole.