Bush Tales
This from Daily Kos (Sept 6). No matter how many articles I read, this is the photograph & story that regurgitates, burns in my throat, over and over again.
Read the full article in the Salt Lake City Tribune. http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3004197
The final paragraph says it all.....
As specific orders began arriving to the firefighters in Atlanta, a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew's first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas.
Look at that B-rate asshole.... rolling up his sleeves.... git n' her done with his firefighter buddies. Good God.
posted by wendy lewis at 9/09/2005 05:05:00 AM
22 Comments:
B-rate is better than he did at Yale so he seems to be showing steady improvement. Course Kerry's a poseur too. I'm waiting for the Obama ticket.
Obama's starting to talk, which is good.
What we're looking at here is the classic American battle that has played out in many forms throughout our history -- always at the peril of "a more perfect union". private sector vs. public. I tell you, if some one could prove to me that private interest would magically pull this country up (AND I MEAN ALL OF US) by our bootstraps (as they say), I'd consider regarding them as anything but fascists.
But, we all know that ain't gonna happen, so what next? What else? Are we really looking to hijack a starship and suffocate on Mars?
The argument and the fight has truly been the same since Woody guthrie wrote on his guitar "This Guitar Kills Fascists". And there you have it --- an ongoing purely American struggle. See you there ...
Watch Obama. Some of his comments put him in the War Party, regardless of this Dem vs Rep malarky. He had strong, threatening words about Iran that matched up pretty nicely with the muckerfuthers in charge.
Just sayin'.
Panderers, all. What I've heard come out of Obama's mouth so far, I've generally liked. But, what Fatguy says.
So what do YOU suggest, B? Any great ideas on the overthrow of the 21st Century robber-barons & the neo-facists? Most of the Dems are only about a half step left of the Repugs.
Problem is --- it all starts at the local level. (Maybe the reverend wood like to chime in at this point?). The Bush administration has gained more ground than we're aware of (as exemplified byu the federal response to Katrina). We have a lot of work to do as private citizens -- the Dem party thinks they are on the cutting edge, but even they don't realze what has happened under their noses. We're all in this together. I'm writing letters every week. that's all I got fer now ... keep the faith, though.
Demonizing the private sector has its place, certainly, as most forms of protest do. The caveats to benevolent business are ubiquitous, and only amateur economists and Fox analysts take Adam Smith economics without the footnotes that have been added in the past 200 or so years. NEVERTHELESS, trade dwarfs aid and likely always will, and though they’ve certainly tried, there’s nothing Noam Chomsky or any other irrelevant ivory tower armchair intellectuals can do about it.
Up till now, many in the business world have dismissed non-profit leaders as paternalistic dreamers, while a roughly equal percentage of non-profits have typecast their for-profit counterparts as hopeless and hypocritical destroyers of health, welfare and the environment. Neither of these shopworn caricatures is very interesting to me; what is interesting is the recent speed at which perceptions are beginning to change.
Business and societal interests are distinct but not necessarily divergent. As Harvard, MIT and Tufts’ profs Tariq Banuri and Adil Najam (who are at times scathing in their reviews of current private sector trends) point out in Civic Entrepreneurship, “Economic motive has certainly to be harnessed in support of the goal of sustainability and sustainable development, but almost invariably through an explicit or implicit partnership between the state, the market, and the citizen.” Not some utopian partnership, a hard-nosed, negotiated partnership.
In other words, what we’re dealing with here are checks and balances. A Fox response would be, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you”, but a more calculated observation would recognize, as Brent does, that the magic hand might be backhanding someone else when we’re not paying attention. It’s all about DIRECTING the hand, not ignoring it and NOT pinning it to the floor with inappropriate, knee-jerk, or unstudied regulation. There is such a thing as enabling regulation, and there is certainly such a thing as business helping the poorest of the poor (Microcredit is growing exponentially)—it’s not all McDonald’s and Phillip Morris. I haven’t lived many places, so I might get cynical yet. I hope not. But at the moment that’s what I’m preaching—learning to harness the power not just of community-level markets but of international markets may open the door to opportunities to scale up impact and reach of poverty reduction. To that end, business may well hold a vital key… or so I pretend.
(Stuff:
http://www.unep.org/DPDL/civil_society/Publications/i_print_ver.asp?fname=i_index.asp
Najam on video—skip a few minutes past the obligatory “thank you’s”—it’s inspiring: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/faculty/najam/video.asp)
Franz, you make some interesting arguments & I admire your "whole-view" picture, which DOES include business & corporate power. One issue, especially on an international level, is the lack of ability to understand other cultural values and economic goals. (read "The Gift" by Lewis Hyde). I have a good friend who is very involved in microfinancing with Citigroup & even if the intention is good, there are a lot of inherent problems that seem to arise around language, cultural values, etc. Some of the big corporate groups interested in micofinancing are imposing a model of captialism (not just economic independence) which doesn't (really!) work in every culture. These efforts often have a vague ring of imperialism, even if, we are setting out to help countries and individuals rise out of poverty through profits. It's very complex. I think you nailed it with your analogy of the hand & I guess I'm just saying that while it's very important to watch the hand, we have to also know that whole illusions can be created from just one sleight of hand--it's how magician's get us to believ they can actually pull a rabbit out a hat!
Mmmm. This is a juicy thread going heah. Nick, I've read "The Gift" (years ago now) but it was impactful ... in fact I read it on Woman Lake and then spread it around to a few friends. But I need to learn more about this microfinancing trend so I can contribute. I'll check your links, Franz. In any case, it does seem that times they are a'changin'.
When I was a sophomore a friend from Bogotá who was a first year public administration/international development masters student at harvard’s kennedy school invited me a few times to his Michael Ignatieff course, and several messages I remember from a lecture on ‘human rights-based development’ help me to reconcile somewhat the social and economic factors of political economy in poor countries (which is, as we know, the majority of them).
First, human rights and economic development are not simply “western individualism universalized.” Recent polls by Latinoberometrico and others indicate what Anonymous rightly points out above – that ‘Southerners’ (this is development jargon for ‘the poor’) are increasingly suspicious of advice from (or even ties to) the North. They suspect, perhaps, that human rights, economic growth and business interest are the Trojan horses behind which follow governance—the Northern Governance Club (knock knock, ‘it’s us! Let us in, we’ll tell you how it’s done…’). Yet just because it HAS at times (maybe more often than not) been this way, doesn’t NECESSARILY mean it has to be this way. Our outsider status, the ‘fuereño’, may engender a certain amount of suspicion, but carries with it a certain leverage as well (provided your objective isn’t seen as a cultural change program).
Secondly, the key to rights is empowerment, partnerships and participation. What this entails is effective education and making use of the vast (and presently quite idle) human resources in these regions (this is where the private sector comes in – there must be the light of opportunity at the end of the tunnel of education…if not, there remains little incentive for the poor to make great sacrifices to educate themselves and the wealthy and well-educated will continue their mass exodus to the West, and the brain-drain will continue). Whether marginalization has been an intended or unintended consequence of politics and policies matters little in end result: systematically disenfranchising significant portions of Southern populations takes the economic muscle and brainpower out of the development process.
Third, and back to good government, is that a functional frame of governance is an absolute necessity for development. And governments and economies may continue to cough and sputter along until violence and lack of rights entitlement can be reigned in. Shame and dishonor are powerful forces, and disillusionment can easily inaugurate a Chavez instead of a Lula.
Franz, I can't discuss this at your level because you are far more better educated and more widely read on economics than I am. I do think our American economic model is flawed, though. Our capitalist system is based on the notion of unlimited resources & ever-expanding growth. This leads to policies favoring exploitaion. I don't believe this to be very realistic and sets us up for collapse.
I think a model based on limited resources and modest, controlled growth is more realistic. It requires policies based on sustainability.
JFK said "...a rising tide raises all boats." But, currently, the boats of the wealthy are rising (and getting bigger) while the boats of the poor sink. I see this as a direct result of deregulation, shifting tax policy, and government favoritism to corporations.
I could go on. But I won't. Yet...
I hear ya, Corona. I've served on boards & comittees. I've seen my share of successes & frustrations both. I'd much rather tackle a project & actually get something done.
I also agree with Brent--it starts on the local level. The Republicans have been building their agenda for nearly 30 years. They started with school boards and city councils. Then they moved into state legislatures. Then on to the national level. All along the way, as they've won seats, they've also added beaurocrats that support the agenda. They've kept a consistent message & stayed on it. They've gotten judicial appointments. Now they control the majority at nearly every level in all 3 branches of government.
Ah, here we approach the truth as to the lacking of "our" version of capitalism. Corps doing bad things should be losing out financially. They screw over the workers, their local environment, the community they operate in, it should cut into profits, since this is the only feedback loop that is left to us non-shareholders. There are ways to build these incentives into the structure of the system itself, but so far, this country ain't interested, and boycotts rarely pack the punch needed.
However, there are alternatives growing...companies that are specifically pro-environment, pro-labor, that you can buy goods from....they're getting there, and there are enough people that want to send their cash in that direction to keep them afloat and ideally growing. But it's going to be a long time before GreenMart beats WalMart. I don't know if we've got that time.....
The current structure doesn't work. I don't know the specifics of how to change it without laying down some serious law and not allowing the corps to govern themselves without this crucial feedback.
And this crap about them being citizens is getting so damn unbelievable, they can lie in an ad and try to call it free speech.
And Corona, I hear you, doers vs organizers, there will always be critics of both. We all love you for the wonderful things you accomplished in helping those folks. Hopefully knowing that helps.
Three cheers!
Did you all make a note? Fearless Leader actually took responsibility for the Feds poor response to Katrina. It's the 1st time he's admitted something's gone wrong on his watch. I have a feeling Rove & the spinners are the one's who decided it was Shrub's best shot at redeeming some credibility with his subjects, er citizens.
Yeah, can you imagine the intense decision-making that went into that one!?!?!? Hours of deliberation ... should we script it? Or should we ride it out? How will it help us? Hmmmm. I don't know, tough call --- okay, George? Here's what you're going to say ... no, maybe not .... jeez ... it'll helpm us in the end, we just need to ride it out. It will eventually be seen as "the buck stops here", so let's do it .... yhou ready Dubya?
I just find it hard to believe there's any sincerity in what he said. I don't trust the guy and, so far as I've seen, he never says anything unless it's expedient to his agenda/political gain.
TC, point taken. North Star, thanks for the burst of helium for the ego (I'll re-read that before my job interviews), but I really don't know anything about economics either. But I hope that puts me in better company rather than worse.
Let me just leave with this, by C.K. Prahalad, widely regarded as one of the few top management thinkers of this generation, and himself a rigorous, roller-upper of the sleaves, and advocate of the dispossessed: "Revolution needn't start at the top. Anyone can spawn a revolution. Yet front-line employees and middel managers today, inclined to regard themseves as victims, have lost confidence in their ability to shape the future of their organizations. They have forogtten that historically it has been the dispossessed--from Gandhi to Mandela, from the American patriots to the Polish ship-builders--who have led revolutions. Notwithstanding all the somber incantations that 'change must start at the top', one must ask how often the monarchy has led to revolution. In our work and research, we have found the ferment of intellectual revolution more often in the middle of organizations than at the top."
The following reading list offers some good chasers to works by the gloom and doom thinkers:
"Which World?: Scenarios for the 21st Century -- Global Destinies, Regional Choices" (Hammond), "Power of the Powerless" (Havel), "The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty through Profit" and "Competing for the Future" (both by Prahalad)
I need to jump in again around the issue of education and partnerships in third world developement. I do agree, Franz, that something needs to be offered in terms of education (especially around economic issues) to growing third-world populations and as you say there needs to be a light at the end of the tunnel for local participants...but I guess I do take issue with some of the current models of microfinance education...this is EXACTLY what my friend at Citicorp is doing...going into underdeveloped nations to conduct educational trainings...maybe I'm off point here, but I think there are several problems in the educative approach in many of these environments (at least at Citigroup) not only because there's no light at the tunnel, but because the whole process seems to lack cultural & social fluidity. Also, a lot of economic trainings that my friend conducts are short-term; a kind of just-mix-water approach to capital development--something I see as distinctly American and a weakness of a capitalist system gone awry (ie. we live for instant gratification) Maybe this is another way of saying that I don't really see corporations investing solid man-power to really educate people yet. I also don't see the training that Citicorp does in countries like Sri Lanka, Columbia and India, etc. as being in the spirit of deep democracy in the sense that often people who are interested in being "educated" are not given a cultural or economic voice. You also probably know that a company like Citigroup is invested in microfinancing not just because they want to do good in the world, but because they also want to develop third-world markets. I don't have a problem with this fundamentally, but again, there's a problem as super q points out with a power injustice. Just what I hear in some of my friend's stories from the road. She is an idealist like you & has been very involved in corporate organizations and international developement for years. Like you, she sees business as a vital element in the solution--but we have a really long way to go.....
TC, I say Badge of Honor.
Shit, how many people who do good get dumped on? It's almost a given in this nutty world we live in. History shows it, our own experiences back it up. If there's no jerks telling you you're doing something wrong, then you may think you're not getting anything accomplished.
You need to get to the point where when these things happen you let out a nice "ahhhhh", and realize you're on the right track.
It's an emotional callous(now there's an odd word, how the heck is that spelled?) that needs to take some hits to build up, but you can turn that train around.
Not that I'm one of those "positive thinkers" by any stretch, at least that I let on, but when you're fully aware of the mindset of "the Man", shit like that is just shit, and a sign that you were right all along.
Missed Dubya. I really hate watching him speak. I think it's his smugness & smirk.
I've been formulating this notion in my head that since corporations are not citizens, that free speech (bogus advertising, or advertising in general), involvement in the political process (corporate campaign donations) were not granted them under the constitution. But now I've learned that the US Supreme Court ruled in 1886(?) that corporations are afforded citizen status under the constitution. That shoots to hell my whole notion of how to reign in corporations and take back control of our country & politics.
I don't believe all corporations are evil. Nor do I believe that business is not an essential part of a vital nation. What bothers me is the favoritism accorded big corporations over small business and individuals. I also hate that our politicians are totally beholden the big business for their election success. And I firmly believe that those politicians give their corporate sponsors the payback they seek. If big business didn't want favors, they wouldn't spend their money.
Another nonsense argument of business is that advertising isn't proven to influence people into buying their products. That aiming ads towards young children isn't effective. If it doesn't work, why do they spend billions of dollars every year?
I like the notion of the American Party. Will there be beer & nachos?
FYI - in the 1950's, corporations accounted for 60% of the government's tax revenue (remember the 50's? The glorious middle class? etc.?). Now, as of 2002, corporations account for roughly 12% of the government's tax revenue. I won't even get into the ratio of CEO pay to worker pay, which basically follows the same trend. Go figure. And then go figure again and you're pretty much there with a complete no-brainer. The corporate lobby is slowly starving the working class --- the proof is in the .... pudding?
Also, I'm going to post another post, so we can continue the conversation on another thread -- just to stay current.
Hi. Yer all the best.
OK. Sadly, many of you are not living in Minnesota (the commune is forming here, as we speak, however.... for the future) but there WAS a politician here at the wedding: my divorce lawyer Bruce Kennedy, who is running for Secretary of State. www.bk4sos.org/test
And Boyce is running, in Wisconsin, for Dane County Supervisor (land usage issues .... and Boyce.... please correct me if I have erred and if I have or not, hold forth on the details & your intentions for the office).
Beyond all that, I cannot possibly catch up with this thread having come here too late. (Don't ask where I've been....) But I am duly educated & interested with all that has been going on here. I think Brent has put up a new post onto which the thread can continue. I have to note, however, that this thread began w/ Kitty returning to school.... a somehow obtusely apt appropriation.
I'm off on a job from Fri-Fri next, but will be reading, if not contributing. Carry on, mon amies!
OK. Sorry.... guess it wasn't on Kitty's post.... apologies. But, it was close enough, I guess....
Post a Comment
<< Home