[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] Re: Progressive Fest 3 this Sat - Getting Out The Progressive Vote

Mon Aug 18 12:28:56 EDT 2014

Perhaps characters like Bernie Sanders, exemplar of U.S. liberalism, should be less categorized as "child murderers", than as « disgusting »  vis-a-vis U. S. foreign policy, militarism, and in particular the Israel-Palestine situation. They find it expedient to go along with an imperial system in which we all are trapped. Sanders of course is not unique in this respect.

I think the decision [of voting or not for a candidate] depends on what one considers of utmost importance: For example, foreign policy (wars an militarism: Gaza, Iraq, Serbia, Ukraine, …), or domestic policy (civil rights, minimum wage, education, conservation, health insurance, etc.). That the two are inter-related is not always comprehended.

I  would not vote for anyone who allows, and in effect promotes, such massacres as we’ve seen in Gaza. One should vigorously protest, resist, organize against, such behavior, not excuse it. My disgust is beyond measure at the turpitude of our current elected (and appointed) officials (with few exceptions) and the system which they permit, one which perpetuates the horrors to which we continually are witness.

It is, however, likely that most do not so react. Their empathy is limited.

This incomplete discussion can carry one far afield.

--mkb

On Aug 17, 2014, at 8:54 PM, 'C. G. Estabrook' carl at newsfromneptune.com<mailto:carl at newsfromneptune.com> [sf-core] <sf-core-noreply at yahoogroups.com<mailto:sf-core-noreply at yahoogroups.com>> wrote:

An interesting discussion of the co-optive effect of "getting out the vote":

http://blackagendareport.com/content/making-case-election-boycott-why-left-should-refrain-us-imperialisms-electoral-charade

--CGE

On Thu Aug 7 17:02:30 EDT 2014, Ricky Baldwin <baldwinricky at yahoo.com> wrote:

Now, Carl, you've insulted me and Cary Nelson both in one broad swipe (a tad funny, I guess, but enough of a reach - connecting poor beleaguered voters to a smug, privileged old hypocrite - not to be a real knee-slapper).

More importantly, I believe you have made my point.  Of course "Voting to support bombing Palestinian children " is "a simple ethical question" -- the question is whether that is in fact what one is voting for.  You imply, of course, that voting for someone who would support, or further, that they would not vote aloud against (even if they would issue a stern statement against) a resolution that may imply such bombing (but not necessarily say so, in its wording), is the same thing.  I claim you oversimplify.

Likewise, I believe that you cheekily misread my comment, but of course "serial killers and mass murderers" are "still just murderers"; my point is precisely that the matter of voting cannot be reduced to that sort of statement.

Thirdly, we are narrowing the scope to its less important components, but you oversimplify again: of course it isn't "criminal" to support a candidate who - among the many other reasons to support or not support him or her - hasn't tried to stop the bloody madness.  It may be many things, but "criminal" is hard to see there.  The question is about complicity.  I don't agree with the strategy, but expecting a vote to pass with or without you and choosing to reserve your thunder for another fight another day, for example, makes a politician only marginally more complicit in the murders than a politician who, seeing the ideal bill failing hopelessly, decides to support it anyway, even if it means that a less perfect bill that may have helped a smaller number of people will therefore fail in favor of a much worse bill or no bill at all that allows more people to suffer; or the voter who, seeing both plausible candidates as promoting various types of killing and letting die, decides not to "support the lesser of two evils" and support one with virtually zero chance of winning, virtually assuring that more people will die or at least that more will suffer.  It is irresponsible, but it is not criminal.

And almost lastly, we are definitely responsible *to a degree* for all our choices, but how much was Sophie responsible for hers?  100%?  90?  70?  50?  40?  How responsible is a desperate mother who finally lands a job at Coca-Cola for the torture and murders they support in Columbia?  Or just the kid on the playground who is told he can have a punch in the face or in the stomach?  I don't like Quinn, but I will take him over Rauner.  I guess that makes me criminal.  The President, as you know, is not up for election this year.  National elections were not really the subject of the discussion of "getting out the progressive vote" as far as I know, and I believe that Aaron was clear that no certain candidate was being endorsed, just vague "progressive" principles, and those mostly just the background for a discussion of tactics.

Don't be silly.  Or if you must be silly, be funnier.

Ricky

________________________________________
From: C. G. Estabrook [carl at newsfromneptune.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 6:25 PM
To: Ricky Baldwin
Cc: Peace Discuss; Occupycu;
sftalk at yahoogroups.com sftalk at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Progressive Fest 3 this Sat - Getting Out The Progressive Vote

Voting to support bombing Palestinian children "is not a simple ethical question"?

Serial killers and mass murderers are [not] still just murderers?

It's not criminal to support [a candidate] who just doesn't try to stop [bombing children]?

And we are somehow [not] responsible for the people we vote for [because] we are constrained severely in our options?

I think you're ready for a job on the UIUC faculty, Ricky:

<http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/university-illinois-fires-professor-steven-salaita-after-gaza-massacre-tweets>.

--CGE

On Aug 6, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Ricky Baldwin via OccupyCU <occupycu at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

Disgusting as this vote was, it was my understanding that not everyone voted for that; rather that no one voted against it.  It was my understanding that the idea was - wrongly, in my opinion - simply not to fight it.  I could be wrong about that detail, but that is a less important point than the fact that not all of the "state and national" Democrats or Republicans are in Congress.  Certainly all Democrats or Republicans are not in office.

Besides, it is not a simple ethical question.  When there are a number of components in play, some of them pointing in wildly opposite directions, and many of them involving people's lives in different ways, while it is no excuse for a pro-war vote, this situation does not easily lend itself to a conclusion such as "serial killers and mass murderers are still just murderers".  We have politicians who voted for these crimes, politicians who did not vote, who were not present, who issued statements against the crimes, and some who have been active against the crimes but did not have a vote in specific decisions or just saw it as a done deal and gave up, like many people who gave up protesting the Iraq war within weeks of the invasion.  is this wrong?  I think so, but I think to call it criminal is a bit far-fetched, just as I'd agree it's wrong to support a candidate who is outspoken in favor of bombing children, but it is not criminal to support one who just doesn't try to stop it.

Are we somehow responsible for the people we vote for?  To an extent, but I think part of that must be an understanding that we are constrained severely in our options.  I think we are equally responsible for people we did not vote for but who took office because of our actions, such as not voting at all or voting for a "third" party, or agitating against the "lesser of two evils".  That's not to say it never makes sense to do those things, but it is definitely not the case that we can plausibly wash our hands of the evil our government does just by refusing to "get out the progressive vote."

Ricky

________________________________________

From: C. G. Estabrook [carl at newsfromneptune.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:00 PM
To: Ricky Baldwin
Cc: Karen Medina; Peace Discuss; Occupycu
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Progressive Fest 3 this Sat - Getting Out The Progressive Vote

Did you note that all the Democrats and Republicans in the US House and Senate voted to support bombing Palestinian children?  The votes were unanimous.

On Aug 6, 2014, at 3:40 PM, Ricky Baldwin <rbaldwin at seiu73.org> wrote:

I think to say that getting out the "progressive vote" is a crime is to caricature oneself, and to imply that all Democrats (or even all Republicans for that matter) support
bombing Palestinian children or refuse to tax the rich is overstated enough as to be nonsense.  Clearly it is not the case.

Even Democrat Naomi Jakobsson proposed a better tax structure for Illinois.  Even Republican Tim Johnson eventually turned against the war in Iraq.  Even democrat Barak Obama has managed to extend health care to millions who did not have access to it before, insufficient though the change definitely is.

Are the leaders of both parties both culpable?  Of course, and so are many others in both parties.  But they are precisely why the "progressive" vote needs to turn out and not concede the field by staying home (even while shouting from the armchair that they're all a bunch of thugs).

Some will always advise us not to touch the elections with a ten foot pole for fear of getting moral cooties.  But real people's lives will be affected by the outcomes, which will be determined by people who vote, and by those who mobilize either large amounts of money or large numbers of voters.

I like David's idea very much about "progressives" organizing discussion, strategizing, and so on, with a couple of caveats.  One of course is that it is realistically a little late in the election-preparation cycle to ask mobilization efforts wait until after a new discussion such as this pulls together and presumably spends some impressive amount of time discussing.  The other is that -- with respect -- I'm not sure it's possible to reach a consensus among groups or people who call themselves "progressive" (even about what is or is not "progressive").  I do think it would be a good idea to work together instead of against one another, despite our differences, but I'm afraid the question of which things to emphasize is exactly what would break up the (re)union.  I think this is why the idea of the Progressive Fest event - though I was not part of planning it - probably was to skip this divisive stage and accomplish what can be accomplished, despite differences.

Otherwise, to propose to only work with the pure of heart and hand, is I fear the road to more loss.  We lose enough already without planning it, if we can help it.

Ricky

________________________________________

From: OccupyCU [occupycu-bounces at lists.chambana.net] on behalf of Karen Medina via OccupyCU [occupycu at lists.chambana.net]
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 12:40 PM
To: C. G. Estabrook
Cc: Peace Discuss; Occupycu
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Progressive Fest 3 this Sat - Getting Out The Progressive Vote

I think this is exactly the point, the Democratic Party continues
further right -- way past the middle. What ALL PARTIES and elected
officials need is a pull to the left. With this as the goal, there are
enough people who are dissatisfied with the Democratic Party who are
willing to come together and make a group effort to pull the party
left, or at least try.

Once a candidate gets elected, not that one has been elected yet, we

need a way to put the elected person's feet to the fire, otherwise

they too will be pulled by the permanent government and powers that

exist. Maybe we can be more powerful together than those who have

power through money.

-karen

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:04 PM, C. G. Estabrook via OccupyCU

<occupycu at lists.chambana.net
wrote:

How can anyone regard the Democrats in state or national office as "progressive"?

>From support for mass murder by Ukraine and Israel to the refusal to fund social supports in Illinois by adequately taxing the rich, the Democrats have shown that they're working for the interests of the 1% - and therefore against the directly opposed interests of the majority.

It's nothing short of a crime against the community at home and abroad to "Get Out the Progressive Vote" for Democrats. As Glen Ford eloquently pointed out, they are not the lesser evil but the more effective evil: <http://www.blackagendareport.com/print/content/why-barack-obama-more-effective-evil
.

--C. G. Estabrook

On Jul 30, 2014, at 12:33 PM, Aaron Johnson-Ortiz, GEO & Progressive Fest <aaron at uigeo.org
wrote:

C. G.,

The November election is coming up and the stakes could not be any higher.  Republican Candidate for Governor Bruce Rauner, who earns $25,000 an hour and who has proposed cutting the state minimum wage , has been ahead in the polls by an average of 9 points since January*, and he is running on an anti-union platform similar to that of Scott Walker in Wisconsin.

This Saturday we are holding an event for community groups, unions, and student organizations for us to work together and strategize on how to register new voters and make sure to turn out irregular voters.

Are you able to come?  please let me know by replying to this email , or RSVP on facebook .   Details:

Progressive Fest 3: Getting Out The Progressive Vote

Saturday, August 2, 2:30 - 5:30PM

Champaign Public Library, Robeson Rooms A&B

This event is non-partisan: we will not be telling people to vote for a particular candidate or party.  However, we will be making commitments about voter registration targets, and discussing how to talk to our members and the public about the issues that matter to us.  This will allow members of non-partisan organizations to join us, as well as those who are part of a partisan organization.

Will you come?  Please let me know if you can.

In addition to union rights and workers issues, we will be talking about immigrant rights, reducing mass incarceration, increasing environmental protections, LGBTQ rights, women’s reproductive rights,  and other key issues.

Please also forward this to your friends and allies.  The agenda is below.

in Solidarity,

--aaron

Aaron Johnson-Ortiz

GEO Staff Organizer

Graduate Employee's Organization

IFT/AFT 6300

www.uigeo.org

217-344-8283

What is Progressive Fest?

Progressive Fest is an event for all sorts of progressive organizations and individuals, including community organizations, unions, faith-based organizations, student groups, environmental activists, etc.  Each Progressive Fest is hosted by a different local organization, but it is open to any and all groups.  Progressive Fest is a non-partisan informal network of progressive organizations in the Champaign-Urbana area and its surroundings.  Some of the organizations that participate are partisan, other are not.  “Progressive Fest 3: Getting Out The Progressive Vote” is hosted by Central Illinois Progressive Democrats of America.

FLIER (feel free to print and distribute):

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_gubernatorial_election,_2014  and http://www.buzzfeed.com/iftaft/who-is-the-real-bruce-rauner-the-top-10-things-yo-ji42

Progressive Fest

for more info about PF, please contact Aaron Johnson-Ortiz at 1001 S Wright St, Champaign, IL

------------------------------------

------------------------------------

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sf-core/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sf-core/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   sf-core-digest at yahoogroups.com
   sf-core-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   sf-core-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
   https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20140818/d80635e9/attachment-0001.html>