Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Monday, October 31, 2011

Salon becomes relevant again

The folks at Salon finally came up with a 99 percenter manifesto, and it's really good stuff.

I have some problems with it -- for one thing, I'm annoyed that the focus is not entirely on ECONOMICS ECONOMICS ECONOMICS. It really is the economy stupid. This is not the time to start talking about gay issues or climate change. It's not that I disagree with Salon's positions, but non-economic statements have no place in a declaration on money and class. Those tumblr photos in which the 99 percenters relate their tales should give us a guide as to what to talk about and what not to talk about.

When it comes to the issue of gay marriage, those within the one percent are probably more tolerant than those within the 99 percent. Therefore, switching the discussion from economics to gays will do nothing to highlight the abuses caused by the one percenters. Talking about gay issues will simply alienate proles who have every financial reason to be on our side. I don't much like that situation, but it is what it is.

Same thing with marijuana legalization: For some absurd reason, polls indicate that, even in liberal California, the majority of the populace prefers to keep weed illegal. Don't ask me why; frankly, I don't care one way or the other. (I do not partake, so this is not really my issue.) Yeah, you can argue that marijuana legalization would have dramatic economic benefits: We could tax the dope and release a whole bunch of prisoners. That'd be fine with me. But apparently it's not fine with the majority of my fellow citizens.

Why alienate potential allies by taking unpopular stances on non-economic issues?

Update: According to the most recent poll, 46% of the nation favors legalization and 50% favors prohibition. Flip those numbers and marijuana becomes a good issue for OWS.
Gay marriage and legal pot are abhorrent to the Reagan-Democrats. I'm thinking that they are not too keen on the OWS movement, as presented by the print and broadcast media, either.
Gay marriage is an economic issue. We have no federal social security benefits. We have no way to protect our spouses economically when one of us is a higher earner and might die before our partner. Heterosexuals can choose to marry to protect their spouses. We are deprived of that choice.

Come on. This isn't about wanting to shove my orientation in anybody's face. It's about equal economic rights as a taxpayer. And for those of us who are senior citizens, it's a huge priority. Yes, there are lots and lots of gay seniors.

Stop thinking all gays are 35 year old wealthy men who have nothing more to do than f*** and go to gay bars in Palm Springs. Stop thinking that we just want to wave our flags and force you all to love us.

It's about SOCIAL SECURITY and health care benefits for us. That is what drives our fear and anger over being a marginal group within the 99 percent. Comprende?
I think the decriminalization of drugs is key because imprisonment is a huge social problem and we missed our window to revamp the penal system when no one championed the Delahunt - Webb proposals.

But the notion that gay rights deserves its own mention is missing the point and indicative of the short-sightedness of tribal politics. That should be rephrased to incorporate full citizenship and privacy for ALL so that it can include WOMEN, entirely MISSING from special mention tho we're the MAJORITY and treated like 3/5 citizens at best...getting pennies on the dollar for the same work as men and subject to ludicrous and invasive probing into our bodies and UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws restricting what legal procedures we can access that should be a matter between a woman and her physician only.
Those issues are irrelevant to the suffering that is going on in the world. People need to put aside these minor issues and focus on the big picture. Period.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lacks focus. Why is regulating Wall Street the fourth point on the list? Should be the top. Where's the part about reigning in the campaign finance circus?
Yup, that is a good article by Salon. I must renew my subscription and TIME magazine, now that they discovered that Hillary R. Clinton is SMART...sure took them close to five years to notice what to us was clear as the sky.
Anon: I am sorry to disagree, but you are the one who does not comprehend.

The document in question is in large part addressed TO the one percent. It is ABOUT the one percent. It details injustices perpetrated BY the one percent.

It discusses the one percenters as though they were a separate species. That's what I like about it.

The manifesto begins by focusing on the crimes committed by that small segment of our citizenry. As it goes along, it loses focus.

Whatever problems gay people may have in this society are not caused by the one percenters. As I said, the one percenters are, on gay issues, probably more tolerant and advanced in their thinking than are the lower-downs.

Even the Bushes, I feel sure, privately favor gay equality. If they don't favor it, they are neutral. The one percent cares only about money; they couldn't care less about how people use their genitalia.

Therefore, a document which damns the one percent for their sins must make no mention of gay this or gay that or gay anything. Because the upper classes, though filthy in many other ways, are not filthy in THAT way. Why bring them up on a charge of which they are innocent? Especially when they are truly guilty of so much else.

You, like many liberals, seem to want to compile a laundry list of That Which Is Desirable. No.

No no no no NO.

There are many desirable things which have no bearing on a discussion of upper class oppression of the lower classes. I want a document focused on ECONOMICS, ECONOMICS, ECONOMICS -- and I want to keep the term "economics" at least somewhat narrowly defined. Other worthy causes can be addressed by other movements.
The stupendous debt that's dragging the country over the cliff wasn't all racked up by Wall Street's derivative mongers-turned-bailout-beggars, Joe.

The blame must also fall upon all the put-it-on-the-charge-card wars of the past decade, which have each been (fuzzily) justified by the collossal lie of 9/11.

And the OWS "protestors" haven't let out a peep (hear the crickets chirping) about THAT issue, have they?

Wonder why?
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic