HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Chris Hedges: "In th...

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:32 AM

Chris Hedges: "In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate"

Thank You for Standing Up

By Chris Hedges

<...>

Turn off your televisions. Ignore the Newt-Mitt-Rick-Barack reality show. It is as relevant to your life as the gossip on “Jersey Shore.” The real debate, the debate raised by the Occupy movement about inequality, corporate malfeasance, the destruction of the ecosystem, and the security and surveillance state, is the only debate that matters. You won’t hear it on the corporate-owned airwaves and cable networks, including MSNBC, which has become to the Democratic Party what Fox News is to the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party. You won’t hear it on NPR or PBS. You won’t read about it in our major newspapers. The issues that matter are being debated, however, on “Democracy Now!,” Link TV, The Real News, Occupy websites and Revolution Truth. They are being raised by journalists such as Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi. You can find genuine ideas in corners of the Internet or in books by political philosophers such as Sheldon Wolin. But you have to go looking for them.

Voting will not alter the corporate systems of power. Voting is an act of political theater. Voting in the United States is as futile and sterile as in the elections I covered as a reporter in dictatorships like Syria, Iran and Iraq. There were always opposition candidates offered up by these dictatorships. Give the people the illusion of choice. Throw up the pretense of debate. Let the power elite hold public celebrations to exalt the triumph of popular will. We can vote for Romney or Obama, but Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil and Bank of America and the defense contractors always win. There is little difference between our electoral charade and the ones endured by the Syrians and Iranians. Do we really believe that Obama has, or ever had, any intention to change the culture in Washington?

In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate, either the Green Party candidate or Rocky Anderson, assuming one of them makes it onto the ballot in New Jersey, but voting is nothing more than a brief chance to register our disgust with the corporate state. It will not alter the configurations of power. The campaign is not worth our emotional, physical or intellectual energy.

Our efforts must be directed toward acts of civil disobedience, to chipping away, through nonviolent protest, at the pillars of established, corporate power. The corporate state is so unfair, so corrupt and so rotten that the institutions tasked with holding it up—the police, the press, the banking system, the civil service and the judiciary—have become vulnerable. It is becoming harder and harder for the corporations to convince its foot soldiers to hold the system in place.

- more -

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/thank_you_for_standing_up_20120123/

170 replies, 15007 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 170 replies Author Time Post
Reply Chris Hedges: "In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate" (Original post)
ProSense Jan 2012 OP
Broderick Jan 2012 #1
warrior1 Jan 2012 #2
Bruce Wayne Jan 2012 #16
Demonaut Jan 2012 #118
Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #122
SidDithers Jan 2012 #3
msanthrope Jan 2012 #6
DonCoquixote Jan 2012 #4
ProSense Jan 2012 #8
Frances Jan 2012 #5
MineralMan Jan 2012 #7
MinervaX Jan 2012 #22
MineralMan Jan 2012 #24
MinervaX Jan 2012 #34
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #39
Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #48
MinervaX Jan 2012 #52
Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #58
MinervaX Jan 2012 #67
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply !
Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #74
Tarheel_Dem Jan 2012 #70
dionysus Jan 2012 #78
MineralMan Jan 2012 #51
MinervaX Jan 2012 #55
Zoeisright Jan 2012 #72
MinervaX Jan 2012 #76
Robb Jan 2012 #146
MineralMan Jan 2012 #77
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #26
MinervaX Jan 2012 #37
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #42
MinervaX Jan 2012 #45
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #47
MinervaX Jan 2012 #50
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #53
MineralMan Jan 2012 #66
Chuuku Davis Jan 2012 #62
ingac70 Jan 2012 #27
onenote Jan 2012 #59
Zoeisright Jan 2012 #71
dionysus Jan 2012 #79
treestar Jan 2012 #95
cpwm17 Jan 2012 #90
MineralMan Jan 2012 #130
mike_c Jan 2012 #9
ProSense Jan 2012 #12
NNN0LHI Jan 2012 #23
sufrommich Jan 2012 #32
mike_c Jan 2012 #121
Ganja Ninja Jan 2012 #68
PDittie Jan 2012 #158
Marr Jan 2012 #100
Le Taz Hot Jan 2012 #157
surfdog Jan 2012 #10
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2012 #56
Number23 Jan 2012 #160
russspeakeasy Jan 2012 #11
Spazito Jan 2012 #13
Leftist Agitator Jan 2012 #54
Spazito Jan 2012 #73
vi5 Jan 2012 #14
Bruce Wayne Jan 2012 #18
vi5 Jan 2012 #99
ProSense Jan 2012 #20
vi5 Jan 2012 #97
LiberalLovinLug Jan 2012 #161
Enrique Jan 2012 #15
Sheepshank Jan 2012 #30
Enrique Jan 2012 #43
woo me with science Jan 2012 #75
Enrique Jan 2012 #94
ProSense Jan 2012 #110
Enrique Jan 2012 #111
ProSense Jan 2012 #117
handmade34 Jan 2012 #17
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #19
yodermon Jan 2012 #21
Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #125
woo me with science Jan 2012 #25
G_j Jan 2012 #33
woo me with science Jan 2012 #38
gratuitous Jan 2012 #41
woo me with science Jan 2012 #44
Marr Jan 2012 #103
Wind Dancer Jan 2012 #82
Marr Jan 2012 #102
G_j Jan 2012 #28
ProSense Jan 2012 #36
sufrommich Jan 2012 #29
marmar Jan 2012 #31
NorthCarolina Jan 2012 #92
FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #35
Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #40
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #49
Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #61
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #81
Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #84
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #88
Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #101
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #104
cpwm17 Jan 2012 #107
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #116
rrneck Jan 2012 #159
cpwm17 Jan 2012 #166
rrneck Jan 2012 #167
redqueen Jan 2012 #46
redqueen Jan 2012 #57
Spazito Jan 2012 #80
redqueen Jan 2012 #114
Spazito Jan 2012 #143
JackRiddler Jan 2012 #142
Spazito Jan 2012 #145
JackRiddler Jan 2012 #148
Spazito Jan 2012 #156
Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2012 #60
redqueen Jan 2012 #63
Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2012 #86
woo me with science Jan 2012 #83
Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2012 #87
Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2012 #64
nobodyspecial Jan 2012 #65
Scurrilous Jan 2012 #89
redqueen Jan 2012 #115
Zoeisright Jan 2012 #69
cpwm17 Jan 2012 #109
stevenleser Jan 2012 #85
SunsetDreams Jan 2012 #98
grantcart Jan 2012 #91
GoCubsGo Jan 2012 #93
spanone Jan 2012 #96
negativenihil Jan 2012 #105
NYC_SKP Jan 2012 #106
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #108
ProSense Jan 2012 #112
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #113
ProSense Jan 2012 #120
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #123
ProSense Jan 2012 #124
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #126
ProSense Jan 2012 #131
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #132
ProSense Jan 2012 #133
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #134
Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2012 #127
Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #140
lapislzi Jan 2012 #119
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2012 #128
redqueen Jan 2012 #129
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2012 #138
redqueen Jan 2012 #141
Proud Liberal Dem Jan 2012 #144
boxman15 Jan 2012 #135
bvar22 Jan 2012 #136
proverbialwisdom Jan 2012 #162
DevonRex Jan 2012 #137
Warren DeMontague Jan 2012 #139
JoePhilly Jan 2012 #147
CakeGrrl Jan 2012 #149
graywarrior Jan 2012 #150
Robb Jan 2012 #151
Hugabear Jan 2012 #152
Adenoid_Hynkel Jan 2012 #170
Warren DeMontague Jan 2012 #153
zappaman Jan 2012 #154
politicasista Jan 2012 #155
bigtree Jan 2012 #163
bluestate10 Jan 2012 #164
SomethingFishy Jan 2012 #165
Rex Jan 2012 #168
Adenoid_Hynkel Jan 2012 #169

Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:34 AM

1. Chris Hedges who?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:35 AM

2. never heard of the guy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrior1 (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:56 AM

16. You lack of awareness of leading voices in this debate isn't a good counterargument

Most of us who've been following the Occupy movement will have seen Chris Hedges's writings. A curious mind might think about using the Google

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bruce Wayne (Reply #16)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:29 PM

118. Google?......what is this "google" you speak of?

screw Chris Hedges

Rome wasn't built in a day

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #118)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:42 PM

122. Rome; wasn't destroyed in a day either,

it expired by death from a thousand cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:35 AM

3. Thanks for posting...

good to know exactly where he's coming from. Kick it every time some "disaffected progressive" posts his dreck here.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:40 AM

6. "Disaffected progressive?" You mean the type who isn't supporting Ron Paul but just wants to talk

about all the issues that Ron Paul is talking about because he is only candidate who is talking about all these important progressive issues?

THOSE disaffected progressives?

Or the ones who still secretly pine for a Cornel West/Cynthia McKinney run for the roses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:36 AM

4. Ok chris, lay off the Ted Rall

If you belive Obama will be as bad as Mitt, you believed that Gore would not have been as bad as W. Go join the folks there that are not interested in actually keeping the GOP out of office.

You cannot do brain surgery if you do not stop the bleeding first. Those of us who do realize this matter as the paramedics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonCoquixote (Reply #4)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:42 AM

8. Hedges

always votes third party. He did not vote for Obama in 2008. He makes this declaration every election as if it's new.

ONLY NADER IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUES
http://www.naderlibrary.com/nader.teamemail110308.1.htm

Ralph Nader Is Tired of Running for President
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002179101

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:36 AM

5. Nothing new here

I have heard this same argument since I could vote way, way, way back when

If you really want change, vote for the people most supportive of your goals in the Party closest to your convictions

YOu have a much better chance of success if you work to dominate one Party rather than throwing your vote away

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:41 AM

7. Oh, way to go, there Chris!

What a revolutionary act...I mean...voting for the Green Candidate...how'd that work out in 2000?

Moron.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:03 AM

22. Yeah, how many Pulitzers do you have on your mantle?

 

Case rested.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:06 AM

24. None. I do have an Article of the Year plaque, though.

Last edited Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:43 AM - Edit history (1)

How 'bout you?

Here's the thing: Awards don't mean that a writer makes sense, necessarily. If you think third party voting makes sense, then you'll like Hedges. I think it's nonsense, so he's not one of my favorite writers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #24)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:15 AM

34. Kind of like receiving the Nobel Peace prize

 

and then waging wars in Pakistan, Yemen, and Libya. I hear ya, awards don't mean squat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #34)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:18 AM

39. Uh, you're the one who was touting award winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #39)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:24 AM

48. Silly FLF, don't you know that awards for obscure writers who reach literally tens of people are....

much more legitimate than those awarded to presidents who pull us out of wars. Tsk. Tsk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #48)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:28 AM

52. Pull us out of wars? where?

 

Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Pakistan, now Syria.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #52)


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #58)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:36 AM

67. If you mean Iraq

 

There are still 40,000 US troops there and thousands of private military contractors

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #67)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:40 AM

74. !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #52)


Response to MinervaX (Reply #52)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:42 AM

78. LOL making shit up is is well.... just making shit up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #34)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:27 AM

51. Yes, that's another award.

I have to wonder why you asked me whether I had won a Pulitzer, like Hedges. Like all awards, they represent something, but do not mean that everything a writer produces is award-worthy. As it happens, I have won some awards for my writing. I don't write professionally about any subjects of interest to the Pulitzer folks, though. Those awards are meaningless, however, except in relation to the particular writing I did at that time to win the award.

It's interesting that you attempt to draw some parallel between my opinion of Chris Hedges with my own work as a writer. Why would you do that, I wonder? I'm not in competition with Chris Hedges for awards. I'm not even writing professionally for publications any longer. I'm retired from that. When I was writing, I wrote about technical issues from a consumer perspective. Now, I write websites for small businesses. Pretty mundane stuff.

You've expanded my opinion about Chris Hedges into some sort of competition. I'm just a DUer. I have opinions. I'm not in competition in any way with any professional political writer, but I do have an opinion, and I feel quite free to express it here on DU. While I'm honored that you even thought to compare me with Chris Hedges, I still have to wonder why you even brought that up.

That has nothing to do with my past profession, you see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #51)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:30 AM

55. You called him a moron.

 

That is an uninformed attack on the man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #55)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:39 AM

72. Are you related to Hedges or something?

Because what you are saying makes no sense at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #72)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:41 AM

76. I've met him and respect him

 

There is no need to call people names, it's rather childish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #76)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:15 PM

146. Those name-callers are *so* childish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #55)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:42 AM

77. No, it is an attack on his column,

where he proposes voting third party, something I feel is moronic. But, you see, Chris Hedges and his column are the subject of this thread. I am not the subject of this thread, despite your attempt to shift the focus. That I believe Chris Hedges to be a moron is my opinion on his political position with regard to voting third party. It is not an uninformed attack, either. I'm familiar with his writings, and believe he is almost unbelievably naive politically if he believes that a third party vote is in any way effective in fostering change.

So far, I have not heard any opinions from you regarding Hedges' column. Perhaps you'll share your thoughts about it, instead of trying to shift focus onto DUers who are commenting in this thread. Or perhaps not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:10 AM

26. Milli Vanilli won some Grammy's too.

Case rested.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #26)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:16 AM

37. Are you a radical?

 

Your icon and username would indicate that you think you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #37)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:19 AM

42. I don't see anything "radical" about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #42)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:21 AM

45. Well, a radical would agree with everything that Hedges wrote.

 

And I thought you were a radical considering all of your bling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #45)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:24 AM

47. Chris Hedges is a "radical"? He is a pulitzer prize winner who works for some pretty mainstream corp

corporate conglomerates.

Edit: Btw, I never agree with "everything" someone writes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:27 AM

50. Also how can you be pro capitalist but your totem

 

animal is Bernie Sanders, the only socialist in the US Senate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #50)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:29 AM

53. Sanders is a capitalist as well. Don't see where you're going with this.

Sanders has a smartphone with a twitter account. I'm typing this on a MacBook Pro.

Edit: Me and Bernie want capitalism to work for all. Hedges is a capitalist as well. Ask him or his wife or family if he works for free.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #45)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:36 AM

66. You seem to be fixated on external things in this

discussion. Very odd, that. So far, I don't believe I've seen any substantive writing from you in this thread. Some snark, but not much in the way of defense of Chris Hedges' column. The subject here is Chris Hedges and what he wrote about voting third party. What's your opinion about that? DUers posting in this thread are not really the subject of the thread.

Can you offer some insights into what Hedges wrote? I mean, it's nice that he won a Pulitzer. That's a great honor, but he did not win one for this column. So, let's talk about this column, OK, not about other DUers? That'd be great.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #26)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:34 AM

62. Great point

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:10 AM

27. What does that have to do with the fact.....

that voting Green may as well be a vote for a Republican? Not a damn thing. And his Pulitzer Prize was part of team coverage at the New York Times on global terrorism. Best I remember the NYT was a cheerleader for war when he got that "prize" in 2002.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:32 AM

59. Ooh. Hedges "won" a Pulitzer.

So did Kathleen Parker and Charles Krauthammer. Are they immune from criticism because they have Pulitzers on their mantle?

And in case you're wondering why I put the word won in quotes -- its because Hedges Pulitzer actually was awarded to the NY Times Staff for a series of ten articles of which Hedges was merely the co-author of one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:38 AM

71. Oh for God's sake.

You think that winning a prize makes you right 100% of the time? Nice lack of logical reasoning there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:44 AM

79. a long ago Pulitzer doesn't changethe fact that he's currently an idiot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MinervaX (Reply #22)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:16 PM

95. None but my vote is equal to anyone who has one

What a ridiculous defense of an indefensible position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:10 PM

90. And a lot of us voted for a Democrat in the last presidential election

How has that worked out for us? Pretty good if you like wars and the police state.

Chris Hedges taught himself three additional languages and knows more about the world then just about anybody. As a reporter he has experienced war first hand. Chris Hedges puts his money where his mouth is. He personally fights for the causes he believes in, including OWS. He was also one of the bravest anti-war voices before the Iraq war. It cost him his job at the NY Times.

It's not Chris Hedges fault that there is currently no solution at the ballet box for our deteriorating nation. Third parties are self defeating. The winners in our elections don't need over 50% of the votes. This makes it impossible for a third party to do much else than harm the party that is supposed to be most like itself. Third parties don't have any path that allows them to get any representation in Washington DC. It's a flaw in our system of government. The main political parties then can ignore the concerns of people like Chris Hedges who support the interests of the majority of Americans; so we end up with a radical centrist party which really doesn't act much differently than the Republican Party.

The crazier the Democratic Party gets, the even more crazy the Republican Party gets. The Republicans must differentiate themselves from the Democrats.

Chris Hedges refuses to surrender. He doesn't feel he is required to support the radical policies of our current political parties. As Democrats, the best we can do is fight the radicalization of the Democratic Party. Anything else is surrender.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #90)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:59 PM

130. Pretty good in a number of ways.

It did work out well for many people. It would have worked out better had we not given the Congress back to the Republicans in 2010, I think. Imagine that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:42 AM

9. Hedges is spot on right....

"The real debate, the debate raised by the Occupy movement about inequality, corporate malfeasance, the destruction of the ecosystem, and the security and surveillance state, is the only debate that matters."


Add to that an evil and exploitative foreign policy.

Which flavor of corporate rule do you like? Most here like the democratic party flavor better than the republican flavor, but it's a shit sandwich no matter how you slice it. We need government that creates solutions for people, not profits for corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:45 AM

12. Same

"Which flavor of corporate rule do you like? Most here like the democratic party flavor better than the republican flavor, but it's a shit sandwich no matter how you slice it."

...nonsense.

The "Bush = (insert Democrat's name)" equation has failed miserably

and with devastating consequences.

There's no difference between Gore and Bush...and we got the Iraq war.

There's no difference between Kerry and Bush (evidently, the death and destruction of the Iraq war wasn't difference enough)...and we got the economic collapse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:04 AM

23. Oh, my

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:13 AM

32. So which 3rd party are you going with? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sufrommich (Reply #32)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:36 PM

121. whichever one represents my political interests the best....

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:37 AM

68. Yes he is.

I might vote for Obama if the vote is going to be close here in Florida but if not I most certainly will be looking at other candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ganja Ninja (Reply #68)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 04:11 PM

158. I live in Texas

where it won't be close, and I think a third-party vote is the smartest way to send a message to Obama to stop with the right wing mollycoddling anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:20 PM

100. You'll never convince the party loyalists.

To them, "issues" are just media-friendly lines of scrimmage that the parties have agreed to fight on. Just PR tussles, as phony as pro-wrestling. For party loyalists, politics is more like a sporting event than anything else.

You're absolutely right, of course. Our political establishment has been running their Punch & Judy show for decades now, while they agree completely on economic and security state issues. But as long as enough suckers accept it, there's no reason to change, I suppose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mike_c (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:58 PM

157. +1

I thought the article was spot on which was pretty ironic given the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:44 AM

10. What a tool bag

 

Another fool implying that the reason progressive ideas don't get signed into law is because of the president

this guy completely ignores that the most progressive person on the planet would still have those policies blocked by Congress

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to surfdog (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:31 AM

56. +1!! This is a lesson that apparently Maureen O'Down needs to learn, too!

People talk a whole lotta shit but don't say a word about governance. They know nothing. I don't care how many Pulitzers they have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to surfdog (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 07:10 PM

160. Yep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:44 AM

11. Thank you for posting this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:49 AM

13. LOL, obviously Hedges thinks voting for Nader et al....

changes anything.....oh, wait....it does, it increases the chances the repubs will win, is that his REAL agenda?

He's a republican in third-party clothing.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #13)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:30 AM

54. "He's a republican in third-party clothing."

 

Your statement is hyperbolic, and more importantly, untrue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leftist Agitator (Reply #54)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:39 AM

73. Not at all...

Voting third-party is, in essence, a vote for the repubs.

Hedges has voted for the Green party ie Nader knowing full well it works to the favor of the repubs hence "a republican in third-party clothing".

There are only TWO choices when it comes to the Presidency, the House and the Senate. They are:

Republicans

or

Democrats

There is NO viable other party, none at all. Voting third party ie Nader et al is, imo, a proxy vote for the repubs. We saw the results of that in Florida in 2000. Hedges saw that as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:51 AM

14. I'm voting and voting for Obama.....but...

The answer to this question in there:

"Do we really believe that Obama has, or ever had, any intention to change the culture in Washington?"

is a resounding now. I did believe it during the 2008 election. I now know that he did not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vi5 (Reply #14)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:57 AM

18. You should only vote once.

I applaud your choice, but you have to follow the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bruce Wayne (Reply #18)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:18 PM

99. At least one of us applauds my choice...

I'm not one of them. I'll feel like I'm letting myself down and I've given up. Which I have, I just don't like to be reminded of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vi5 (Reply #14)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:00 AM

20. I think

"The answer to this question in there:

"Do we really believe that Obama has, or ever had, any intention to change the culture in Washington?"

is a resounding now. I did believe it during the 2008 election. I now know that he did not."

...a lot of people put their expectations too high and others expected the U.S. to reverse course completely in too short a period of time.

There are powerful forces fighting change every step of the way. I mean, look at Citizens United, which even has the backing of organizations like the ACLU.

The fact is that a lot has been done, and a lot more needs to be done.

Flashback: Richard Kirsch on the passage of health care reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002200857

The Case for Obama...a truly historic presidency
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108

Trying to depress the Democratic vote under the guise of forcing change is ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:16 PM

97. Look, I'm sorry but if for no other reason...

Than the people he appointed. I'm sorry, I know they have their apologists and people make the "Oh well they knew the system so it could be changed from within" or whatever excuse they gave.

But at every point he's chosen either the epitome of insiders, or people whose track record and everything else indicates they would enforce the status quo.

I'm not saying nothing has changed in that no laws have been passed or anything of that nature.

I'm saying the way things are done. The culture of money and insider status and all of that. It was a lot of pretty words but either he had no intention of changing it at all, or he did but just gave up almost immediately.

If anything, through his relentless placement of "bipartisanship" above everything else, he succeeded only in shifting the acceptable terms of debate rightward. I just don't believe he's stupid at all, so he had to have known exactly how reaching out to Republicans was going to work out. Anyone who has paid attention at all to politics in any way shape or form had to have known this. So by allowing it to come to pass as it did despite every possible warning every step of the way, we've now moved so far right as a country that I'm afraid there's no hope to turn back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vi5 (Reply #97)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 09:02 PM

161. Very well put

Nothing really to add. I'd still vote Obama, although if Mitt wins, there is even less of a difference to show for it. ObamaCare and RomneyCare are six of one, half a dozen of the other. Obama has already shown he isn't as progressive as his primary declarations implied, and probably Mitt isn't as teaparty as some of his more extreme declarations have implied.

It more about voting for the candidates overlords and the influence they weld on them. Democrats and Obama are bought out, but still have a few reps left with a shred of moral dignity and also have some kind of historical pedigree, since FDR at least, to if not influence their positions, then perhaps to at least shame them into doing what is right. The Rethugs are 100% corporate tools where servicing the 1% is the only goal.

And hey if you can have the last word in a sub-thread with ProSense, your doing something right!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:54 AM

15. it's an ongoing question

it won't get discussed at DU because DU has decided not to allow one side. Their reasoning makes sense to me. They want DU to be one thing, and allowing discussions of third-party would turn it into something else.

But just because it's not discussed here doesn't mean it's not a valid question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #15)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:12 AM

30. "....it won't get discussed at DU because DU has decided not to allow one side"

poppy cock

I've seen plenty of threads that clarify your misrepresentation, and I know you've participated in and started plenty of those threads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #30)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:19 AM

43. bullshit

utter bullshit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #43)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:40 AM

75. Upthread is already all about trashing Chris Hedges

so that the message is not discussed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #75)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:15 PM

94. of course

the enemies list just grew by one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #94)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:04 PM

110. It

"of course the enemies list just grew by one."

...appears you expected that Democrats wouldn't criticize someone advocating a vote for a third party.

I suppose criticizing Republicans also means "the enemies list just grew"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #110)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:10 PM

111. criticizing is one thing

purging is another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #111)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:26 PM

117. What?

"criticizing is one thing purging is another."

He's not a fucking Democrat!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:56 AM

17. read the article this morning

good read and I mostly respect Chris Hedges... but, no way is a third party vote goin' help us this year

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:57 AM

19. I think when Obama says "change the culture in Washington" he meant Congress is broken.

And that Congress continues to put party ahead of problem solving. Which is true. And Obama brings up that point over and over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:03 AM

21. OCCUPY the DNC, Chris.

The DNC is the best existing apparatus that could be leveraged for OWS's goals.
Run for Congress as a OWS Democrat, Chris!!
Stop bashing the one entity that could be helpful! Team up with Alan Grayson! (for example)
Think outside of this 3rd party box you've created for yourself, and are now tarnishing OWS with!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #21)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:46 PM

125. There is no such thing as an OWS Democrat.

OWS is non-partisan. Yes, there are Democrats who are engaged with OWS but OWS is not the opposite of the Tea Party which does identify with the Republican party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:09 AM

25. When things like this are happening,

one would think a discussion board like DU would be deeply concerned about why and committed to talking about solutions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #25)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:14 AM

33. it's easier to vilify people

I suppose. Since third party solutions are out, I also suppose two party solutions are painfully limited.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #33)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:17 AM

38. That's the game, for sure.

The argument for voting for this is that the alternative is worse.

This is the advantage for the corporate elite of purchasing both parties. You can put forth two candidates, one of whom will move rightward and the other of whom will speed rightward, and the people will still vote to move rightward.

Being put in a position of voting for someone out of fear should enrage all of us.

Occupy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #25)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:18 AM

41. Bwahahahahaha!

Oh man, that was a good one!

No, the reaction will be "Chris Bad! Democrats Smash! Grrrrrr!" A deeper examination of what Hedges is saying and a discussion about some of the whys and wherefores isn't going to happen at DU as currently constituted. But we can definitely look forward to all the posts crowing about the total vindication of the Obama administration when the general election results come back in November, and be treated to four more years of "Never mind what happened, pay attention to the wonderful-sounding words!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gratuitous (Reply #41)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:20 AM

44. Yeah, should've put the sarcasm icon in there.

What a travesty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gratuitous (Reply #41)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:27 PM

103. Yep, if he wins, it will be trumpeted as a complete vindication of

his right-of-center approach. If he loses, the blame will be placed at the feet of liberals.

Seen it a million times. The only constant is the cry that we need to 'ignore the left'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #25)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:53 AM

82. One would think!

It's more about attacking the messenger without any discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #25)


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:10 AM

28. so what?

it's supposedly a free country..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to G_j (Reply #28)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:16 AM

36. Yes

"so what? it's supposedly a free country.. "

...it's a "free country," and that's also why some people vote for Republicans.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:12 AM

29. I'm convinced this guy is the Ann Coulter of the left.

He writes whatever he thinks will get people talking about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:12 AM

31. Rec'ing.....only for the excellent column by Chris Hedges.


Hopefully people will read it in its entirety.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:12 PM

92. Some will, others will just bash. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:16 AM

35. Why not instead just spend 4 years helping/campaigning for Rocky Anderson in 2016?

The guy has zero chance this year. A vote for Rocky might as well be a vote for the republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:18 AM

40. Gosh. Chris must think his vote belongs to him and not to a party or candidate.

"Vote in the Streets" - An SDS button I still have somewhere from '68.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #40)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:25 AM

49. Sure his vote is his, I agree.

Knowing where his vote will lie with a third party, I think his articles that get posted here can now be viewed with a different lens. One that is not being objective, but rather partial. He is voting Third Party, and that is his right. It is now my right to disregard his articles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #49)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:33 AM

61. "Difference of opinion are what make horse races." Mark Twain

Obviously, your opinions, and principles, differ from Hedges, and the lens you use to view them is also different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #61)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:48 AM

81. I don't agree with Chris Hedges

I will not be a Third Party voter. I am voting Democratic, the party that represents me. Have they done everything that I want? Absolutely not, but I realize they've had obstacles in the way, ie a Republican party of NO that does everything it can to not get anything done, because they want the Democrats, specifically the President to fail. Hey it works with people who don't look at the bigger picture of what is going on and the reasons that things are at a stand still now. I will not ignore that and vote for some other candidate in this case party because I didn't get everything done when I wanted it. Voting third party is a vote for the Republicans. NO thank you. I will vote for Obama and Democrats. We need to take back the House and get more of our party elected in the Senate to truly effect change. I'm not going to take my ball and go home. If Chris Hedges wants to vote Third party that is his right, but he is throwing his vote away out of "principle" that only amounts to going backwards. Progressives don't seek to move backwards, we are forever looking forward and seeking more change to make things better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #81)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:57 AM

84. "The bigger picture"

As Hedges (and I) see the "bigger picture" we now have a corrupt system of two capitalist/centrist parties. It's very hard to "change" the system by perpetuating it.

My "principles" are from the left end of the political spectrum not the center. I see no reason to "throw away my vote" on centrists or conservatives whose policies I disagree with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #84)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:07 PM

88. so you will be voting Third Party?

I don't agree that we are no different than the Republicans. It's very hard to work for "change" when that label is perpetuated, which is not true. You can believe that if you wish, that is your right to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #88)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:24 PM

101. I'll be voting for the most progressive, anti-war, candidates on the ballot.

I'm a registered Democrat (since 1965) and usually vote for Democrats as the lesser of two evils. But, my nose holding ability has withered with age and the Democratic party's inexorable move to the right. I see the only way to change that is to make them earn our votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #101)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:27 PM

104. ahh I see, good luck with that

I'll be voting Democratic, in this case President Obama for re-election. I'll also be voting Democratic down ticket and seeking to take back the House and get more Democrats elected in the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #104)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:42 PM

107. And that is why the Democratic Party keeps moving right

That is where the money is and there are always plenty of suckers that will continue to vote for them - regardless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #107)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:25 PM

116. Ok

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #107)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 06:33 PM

159. Well, you've got four choices.

1. Don't vote. That makes you irrelevant.

2. Vote third party. See #1.

3. Vote Republican. That makes you a fucking idiot.

4. Vote Democratic.

So which one are you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #159)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:42 PM

166. The thing is, if things stay as they are our nation's future will continue to decline

If our politicians know that we will vote for them while they continue to screw us, their corrupt and evil behavior will continue.

There are no short term solutions. Washington DC is too corrupt. If the politicians know that they have to behave themselves or they will not get the vote, then only then will things start looking up.

The only other way that things could turn around is if there is a major disaster caused by our government, such as a war or economic collapse; though in that case the outcome is unknown.

I've never voted for a Republican and I'm even less likely now; but I will not vote for a Democrat that behaves like a Republican either. I particularly won't vote for anyone that murders anyone - including foreigners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cpwm17 (Reply #166)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:51 PM

167. The problem is

if you don't vote for the Democrat you'll get the Republican. Better to put our Guy in there and make his life a living hell rather than some Republican do the same to us.

I hear what you're saying, but it took forty years to get into this mess, and it'll take more than four to get out. The truth is that Obama is as liberal as this country can get right now. We won't see what we're looking for in a president until after Biden - if we're lucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:31 AM

57. Stephen Harper's Conservatives win Canadian election

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13259484

I wonder if Canadians are happy about the new direction their country is going in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #57)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:45 AM

80. Not happy at all...

60% of Canadians did NOT vote for the Reform aka Alliance/New Conservative (they kept changing their name in hopes of running away from their racist, homophobic policies).

The multi-party system works only when one side of the political spectrum is split while the other side remains united under one party. The left in Canada is split 4 ways hence the Reform getting in with 40% of the vote.

You are making a very good point, redqueen, as to the consequences of multi-party systems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #80)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:24 PM

114. It's scary to think we may end up with President Newt, or President Romney...

or dare I say it, another President Bush (Jeb could try a sneaky move at the convention, it wouldn't surprise me given how unpopular Romney is and how tarnished and horrible Newtie is).

I agree with others that the push for real change has to come from outside the government, but why elect people who are more opposed to what we'd be fighting for? I just don't get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #114)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:40 PM

143. I don't get it either...

change does need to happen but, to me, the way to do it is to begin the change by running for local office ie school board, city councils, various other boards, start locally and work up, that's what the repubs did over a period of 30 years and they were very successful. It is why they still control so much of the local landscape which is where real influence as to direction in education, assistance, taxation, party affiliation etc, happens.

All politics is local.

This takes work, work over time, to do. Simply voting third-party will never accomplish any real change, imo, and risks putting in power a party, republican, that will destroy all that those who tout third-party voting say is important.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #80)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:39 PM

142. Actually, the problem is with the lack of representation.

Canada, the US and UK all suffer from electing winners, rather than representatives. Whoever gets the most votes, even a minority, gets to be the exclusive holder of an office. 49 percent (or more, given splits) can go screw themselves. They have no representatives. By comparison, in Germany (very stable and prosperous country, I hear), representation is based on actual share of the vote, so that if a party clears the minimum hurdle (5 percent of the vote) they get a representation proportional to their vote share. Eight percent means 8 percent, 41 percent means 41 percent (and not, as in Britain, a 2/3 majority!). Disparate elements of society are (goodness gracious) forced to form coalitions and synthesize solutions that are amenable to more than one party. It's called "proportional representation," but the truth is, it's the only system that merits the name of representative at all. Again: We don't elect representatives, we elect winners who get to do what they want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #142)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:07 PM

145. In order for the US to have what Germany has re proportional representation...

it would require a constitutional amendment and I don't see that happening.

Because Canada is a Parliamentary system of governance, it would be easier to go to proportional representation on votes and not the current winner take all based on the number of seats won but, that issue has been turned down a number of times both provincially and federally.

Proportional representation has it's pluses and minuses, it can lead to minority governments falling quite often, sometimes within a year of being elected, which means the country is in a constant state of turmoil or it can be a stabilizing force where the populace believe their vote counted because of the proportional division of seats.

I am equivocal on it, have not decided whether to support it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #145)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:22 PM

148. Either way...

Proportional representation has it's pluses and minuses, it can lead to minority governments falling quite often, sometimes within a year of being elected, which means the country is in a constant state of turmoil or it can be a stabilizing force where the populace believe their vote counted because of the proportional division of seats.


"Turmoil" and "stability" can happen in every species of political order, as do corruption, obsolescence and falling into authoritarian and modern feudalism, as in the West today. So either way, I'm for democracy over the oligarchy that we have (which is enabled by the "lone winner" system).

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #148)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:55 PM

156. Yes, they do at times, as Churchill said...

Last edited Mon Jan 23, 2012, 05:18 PM - Edit history (1)

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

Democracy is messy regardless of which system of governance is in place.

Corruption occurs in proportional representative governance systems as often as it occurs in others.

Re Germany, check out the numerous corruption issues that have occurred within their various governments.

Can you definitively point to an active system of governance that has NOT had "corruption, obsolescence and falling into authoritarian and modern feudalism" as part of it's governance history?

I cannot think of one but am more than willing to be educated about such a system.

Edited to add: Here is an actual system of governance that is very unique, it is a consensus form of governance being practiced today in the Territory of Nunavut in Canada. It has NO parties at all:

"Nunavut will have no political parties at the territorial level. Instead, the legislative assembly of the new territory will operate on the basis of consensus politics. Like the aboriginal decision-making system it mimics, the legislative assembly's decisions will be made according to the consensus of the majority of its members rather than political party lines. Political parties exist in Nunavut only for the purposes of supporting candidates running in federal elections.

In February 1999, Nunavut elected its first 19-member legislative assembly. (A groundbreaking proposal to elect an equal number of women and men to Nunavut's legislative assembly was defeated in a 1997 Nunavut-wide plebiscite.) The members of the legislative assembly (MLAs) hold a secret ballot to elect a speaker, who oversees operation of the assembly. Also elected in a secret vote by the MLAs is the premier of Nunavut, as well as the executive (cabinet). The regular sittings of the assembly will be open to the public."

http://www.nunavut.com/nunavut99/english/public_gov.html






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:33 AM

60. "Our efforts must be directed toward acts of civil disobedience, --

to chipping away, through nonviolent protest at the pillars of established, corporate power."

I agree with him completely on this. The change this country needs will only come from outside the current political system. We need to make our leaders fear us, plain and simple -- fear us more than they need the corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hell Hath No Fury (Reply #60)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:35 AM

63. I agree that significant change has to come from outside the government...

no good thing was ever started from those at the top, they always have to be dragged forward by the people (e.g. civil rights, worker's rights, etc.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #63)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:03 PM

86. "...they always have to be dragged forward by the people."

I agree. When I look back, our successes have been when we have come together and taken/demanded what was ours.

Time to kick it up a notch -- American Revolution v. 2.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hell Hath No Fury (Reply #60)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:53 AM

83. Yup.

Occupy is our best visible hope right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woo me with science (Reply #83)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:04 PM

87. Can't wait for spring to hit --

An "American Spring" is what our country needs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:36 AM

64. He has a huge ego if he thinks we care why this announcement is being made.

So, he's voting for a Third Party candidate. So, what! It's his vote and he has every right to cast that vote.

And *I* have every right not to read his articles or take anything he says to heart.

He has to live with the consequences of that vote, just as I have had to live with the consequences of voting for Nader in 2000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:36 AM

65. He's so right and quite a hero for championing this stance

People have not suffered enough. When they are truly miserable with no hope and no future, they will rise up and stage a glorious revolution -- likely violent and perhaps with the deaths of the 1% -- and the progressives will ride in on white horses to fill the void and there will be peace and prosperity throughout the land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nobodyspecial (Reply #65)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:07 PM

89. Had me going there for a second.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scurrilous (Reply #89)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:25 PM

115. Same here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 11:37 AM

69. What a fucking idiot.

Thanks for enabling repukes, you douchebag. This is EXACTLY the same kind of drivel that infected the world with George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Thanks a lot, Hedges. Go to hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #69)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:54 PM

109. No, the Democratic Party keeps enabling the Republicans by continually moving right,

and by refusing to stand up for the American people.

Democratic Voters enable the Republicans by continually voting for these right-wingers. The farther to the right the Democrats move, the farther to the right the Republicans go.

But if your only goal is to elect Democrats, well keep doing that. Let's see how that turns out for us if too many voters maintain that philosophy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:02 PM

85. This is a surrender position. Its a "We cannot do it" position.

If you think you are in the right and can convince a substantial amount of what consists of the left here in this country of that, you should be trying to take over the county Democratic Executive committees, electing your own state reps, and then taking over the state Democratic Parties, and then the DNC.

If you aren't trying that, it means you cannot convince those to the left of the centerline in this country that you are right. Hedges is smart enough to know all that, so he is surrendering by voting third party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #85)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:17 PM

98. exactly, raising the White Flag

Forget it, I surrender never accomplished anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:11 PM

91. Chris if you really want to make a statement tell the world that you and your family are


going to give up your health care coverage, then I would be impressed.


When you actually put you and your children at risk then your principled stance will have something behind it.


Now your just a gadfly that 99% of the people have never heard of.


Your dad was a hell of a guy however.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:14 PM

93. MSNBC is the Democratic version of GOPFoxNews?

That, right there, is enough for me to not take this joker seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:16 PM

96. in a free society we are allowed to piss away our votes if we wish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:29 PM

105. this is just code for

"i'm voting republican but lack the balls to admit as such."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:30 PM

106. Is it syphillis or gonorrhea that makes you crazy?

I've forgotten.

And I'm wondering if just mentioning these diseases in a thread about a "progressive" will get the reply alerted upon and hidden by a jury because of the perception that some untouchable person has been slighted by NYC_SKP.

The way a reply I had about Harry Belafonte was alerted upon and removed by a jury.

Too fuckin' funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 12:50 PM

108. Chris Hedges is a grown man and can make his own decisions.

He can do what he wants. People scolding him are downright amusing...almost like they are his parents.

LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #108)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:11 PM

112. Sure

"Chris Hedges is a grown man and can make his own decisions. He can do what he wants. People scolding him are downright amusing...almost like they are his parents."

...he is, but being a "grown man" doesn't mean he can't be criticized, even if you choose to characterize such criticism as people "scolding him."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #112)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:20 PM

113. What can Obama do to bring people like Chris Hedges back into the fold?

Rather than simply lashing out at Hedges, perhaps we should analyze the situation a little more closely and try to understand why he's not voting Democratic. Why has he chosen to vote 3rd party? Perhaps the Democratic party could pursue different policies that will prevent people like Chris Hedges from voting 3rd party. Perhaps a little less corporatism and pro-MIC nonsense is needed.

Of course digging deep requires a little bit of critical thinking. Perhaps it's easier just to lash out and attack Chris hedges personally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #113)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:31 PM

120. Is

What can Obama do to bring people like Chris Hedges back into the fold? Rather than simply lashing out at Hedges, perhaps we should analyze the situation a little more closely and try to understand why he's not voting Democratic. Why has he chosen to vote 3rd party? Perhaps the Democratic party could pursue different policies that will prevent people like Chris Hedges from voting 3rd party. Perhaps a little less corporatism and pro-MIC nonsense is needed.

Of course digging deep requires a little bit of critical thinking. Perhaps it's easier just to lash out and attack Chris hedges personally.

...this supposed to serious?

Hedges always votes third party. He did not vote for Obama in 2008. He makes this declaration every election as if it's new.

ONLY NADER IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUES
http://www.naderlibrary.com/nader.teamemail110308.1.htm

Ralph Nader Is Tired of Running for President
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002179101

The "Bush = (insert Democrat's name)" equation has failed miserably and with devastating consequences.

There's no difference between Gore and Bush...and we got the Iraq war.

There's no difference between Kerry and Bush (evidently, the death and destruction of the Iraq war wasn't difference enough)...and we got the economic collapse.

Hedges can do whatever he wants to with his vote, but don't pretend that it's about forcing change for the better.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #120)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:42 PM

123. Obama and the Dems should do more to appeal to people like Chris Hedges

ending corporatism = easy election victories

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #123)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:44 PM

124. Hedges

"Obama and the Dems should do more to appeal to people like Chris Hedges...ending corporatism = easy election victories"

...is a "grown man." He can do whatever he wants to with his vote. He obviously believes voting third party is the way to do that.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #124)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:47 PM

126. "He obviously believes voting third party is the way to do that."

Yes...he made that clear. The point I'm making is that Obama and the Dems should pursue policies that appeal to people like Hedges so that they don't vote third party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #126)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:00 PM

131. And

"The point I'm making is that Obama and the Dems should pursue policies that appeal to people like Hedges so that they don't vote third party."

...the point I'm making is: are you serious? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=206650

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #131)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:01 PM

132. Yes. I'm serious.

Obama and the Dems should pursue policies that appeal to people like Hedges so that they don't vote third party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #132)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:05 PM

133. No,

not convincing. I don't really believe you're serious. A person votes against Democrats consistently (Gore, Kerry, Obama) isn't interested in being appealed to.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #133)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:07 PM

134. You are certainly entitled to your opinion.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #113)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:48 PM

127. Well, pandering to the right and whining about the "professional left" isn't working.

Not with Chris Hedges and not with me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #127)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:22 PM

140. Some people probably think Chris Hedges should be more like Andrew Sullivan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:30 PM

119. I usually agree with Hedges.

Not this time. There is simply too much at stake.

Far more eloquent and persuasive to say that elections are won by going door to door. The Republican party learned that lesson decades ago when they started stacking school boards and moved upwards from there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:57 PM

128. Chris: Voting can and DOES alter corporate systems of power

1980, 1984, 1988, 1994, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010: For the worse
1992, 1996, 2006, 2008: For the better
2012:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #128)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 01:58 PM

129. It's not better enough,

so let's try worse again?

I don't get it, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #129)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:15 PM

138. We're never going to make any real progress with that kind of mentality

We need to have more of a "long game" strategy like the right has had for decades and learn to stick with it. As Carrie Fisher once put it, "The problem with instant gratification is that it isn't fast enough." IMHO not even the most ardent progressive politician would be able to fix everything instantly and without at least some compromising along the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #138)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:35 PM

141. The right took decades to get where they are now.

It sure didn't happen overnight, or over the course of one 8-year administration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #141)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:02 PM

144. Nope

they created think-tanks, infiltrated school boards, infiltrated the courts, and the Republican Party at the state and local levels, took control of statehouses. It didn't happen overnight but because their followers stick with them and support their "long game" strategy even when they don't always agree with each other on some things, they have been able to build an infrastructure that helps support them politically even during tough times. We need to do the same thing IMHO if we ever hope to push progressive policies at the state, local, and federal levels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:09 PM

135. I respect Chris Hedges, but that's absurd.

Voting third party will make a GOP White House more likely. It'll be like 2000 all over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:11 PM

136. Thank You for posting this!

I actually gave it a Kick and a DURec in the hopes that more thinking DUers will actually
Go to The Link and read the entire article
which was about so much more than the Voting 3rd Party element you carefully excised
and chose to highlight here in an effort to discredit hedges.

So for DUers reading this thread, do yourself a favor:
Go to The LINK and read the entire article.

"The real debate, the debate raised by the Occupy movement about inequality, corporate malfeasance, the destruction of the ecosystem, and the security and surveillance state, is the only debate that matters. You won’t hear it on the corporate-owned airwaves and cable networks, including MSNBC, which has become to the Democratic Party what Fox News is to the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party. You won’t hear it on NPR or PBS. You won’t read about it in our major newspapers. The issues that matter are being debated, however, on “Democracy Now!,” Link TV, The Real News, Occupy websites and Revolution Truth. They are being raised by journalists such as Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi. You can find genuine ideas in corners of the Internet or in books by political philosophers such as Sheldon Wolin. But you have to go looking for them.

<snip>

"We looked at polling on seven key issues and found supermajorities of Americans—60-plus percent—were with us on issues including health care, retirement, energy, money in politics,” he said. “We are more mainstream than Congress. We aren’t crazy radicals. We are trying to do what the people want. This is participatory democracy versus oligarchy. It’s the elites versus the people. We stand with the majority.”



http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/thank_you_for_standing_up_20120123/






You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #136)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 09:08 PM

162. BRAVO! And I like that your link starts on page 2 of Hedges' essay.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2012, 01:28 PM - Edit history (1)

Funny, as a staunch Obama supporter, I easily ignored the first part of the essay (page 1 on voting third party) which is the topic of this thread, while deeply admiring the inspiring eloquence of the rest.

IMO, a former community organizer isn't threatened by public protest supporting the policies he campaigned on and probably providing ballast against unwanted external forces.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:13 PM

137. LOL. What a fucking fool!!!

Might as well write STUPID on his forehead and sit him on a stool with a dunce cap on his head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:17 PM

139. That does it! I'm convinced.

I'm voting for Roky Erickson, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:16 PM

147. Hedges is not logically consistent.

In one paragraph he says ...

Voting is an act of political theater. Voting in the United States is as futile and sterile as in the elections I covered as a reporter in dictatorships like Syria, Iran and Iraq.


That statement is nonsense on its own ... but then he says that he WILL VOTE.

In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate, either the Green Party candidate or Rocky Anderson, assuming one of them makes it onto the ballot in New Jersey, but voting is nothing more than a brief chance to register our disgust with the corporate state. It will not alter the configurations of power. The campaign is not worth our emotional, physical or intellectual energy.


If voting is futile and sterile, why vote at all??

Or is that his real message ... that its not worth our emotional, physical or intellectual energy?.

So stay home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:24 PM

149. Dumbass. -nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:24 PM

150. WGAS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:25 PM

151. "Shooting your own foot is BOUND to work THIS time!!11"

I love me some wealthy revolutionary jargon. "You guys, go hit the streets. Thanks."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:29 PM

152. Advocating a Third-party candidate violates DU rules - UNLESS you have a Pulitzer

Then you can advocate away. Who cares if it helps Gingrich, Romney, Santorum, or Paul get elected in November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #152)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 01:41 AM

170. and to those who think there's no difference, six words:

John Roberts, Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotmayor, Elena Kagan
Citizens United

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:37 PM

153. Chris Hedges is an asshole.

He can go smoke a turd, for all I care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #153)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:39 PM

154. Ha!

"smoke a turd"!
I like it!
Fuck Chris Hedges.
Oh, and fuck Ron Paul too...just cuz it should be said every day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 03:52 PM

155. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 09:15 PM

163. so we can safely ignore him now?

. . . glad he's being upfront about it. I hope he's honest enough about the result of all that nothing, in the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:09 PM

164. What is the dumbasses' Plan B after he has

voted to fuck up democracy by helping to elect another clueless neocon? People like the Hedges idiot need to pull their heads out of their asses before they set the causes that they claim to love back a century.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 10:24 PM

165. His right..

Just like it's your right to post it here so he can get flamed. . Just like it's my right to laugh at both of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 01:29 AM

168. Okay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Tue Jan 24, 2012, 01:39 AM

169. yeah, that's real practical

Vote for a non-entity no one's ever heard of (I don't think even Nader is running this year) to make yourself feel good, then ignore the very real differences between Obama and the GOP and cheer when Newt or Mitt gets elected, as you feel you made your point by voting for the "I love cheese" party or whoever you settle on..

Pity the rest of us have to suffer the very real consequence for vain purity demonstrations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread