The Nation: Russ Feingold Speaks Out

[Emit]

Russ Feingold was a different kind of senator—more committed to progressive principles than to a party, an internationalist who opposed free-trade deals because they served multinational corporations rather than multinational communities, a stalwart defender of the Constitution whose commitment to civil liberties and regard for the requirement that wars be declared by Congress led him to stand alone against presidents and colleagues.(...)

~snip~

So it should come as no surprise that Feingold will be a different kind of ex-senator. Instead of retaining his residence in Washington and signing on with some K Street lobbying firm, he packed up his apartment and headed home to Middleton, Wisconsin, where he'll live in the same modest house he owned when he first ran for the Senate in 1992. Feingold has taken a teaching post at Marquette University's Law School in Milwaukee, and he's already outlining a book that will be highly critical of recent US foreign policy (...)

~snip~

(...) What should progressives do now?

I don't know how it could be more stark or clear: this entire society is being dominated by corporate power in a way that may exceed what happened in the late nineteenth century, early twentieth century. The incredible power these institutions now have over the average person is just overwhelming: the way they can make these trade deals to ship people's jobs overseas, the way consumers are just brutalized and consumer protection laws are marginalized, the way this town here—Washington—has become a corporate playground. Since I've been here, this place has gone from a government town to a giant corporate headquarters.

To me, the whole face of the country—whether it be the government, the media, agriculture, what happens on Main Street—has become so corporatized that the progressive movement is as relevant as it was one hundred years ago, maybe more so. It's the same issues. It's just that power, because of money, international arrangements and communications, is so overwhelming that the average person is nearly helpless unless we develop a movement that can counter that power. I know we've all tried over the years, but this is a critical moment. We need to regenerate progressivism and make it relevant to what's happening right now. But there's no lack of historical comparison to a hundred years ago. It's so similar; the only real difference is that corporate power is even more extended. It's the Gilded Age on steroids.

~snip~

http://www.thenation.com/article/157719/russ-feingold-speaks-out

[LiberalEsto]

1. +1000

Feingold is totally clear about the root of our problem, unbridled corporatism.
And he's right that the only answer is to develop a movement to counter it.

[WingDinger]

2. Always was my fav.

[DCKit]

3. Damn sure one of our top five. nt

[Hannah Bell]

4. kr

[dhill926]

5. hope he can make it back......

to the Senate after the current era of madness runs it's course.

[ThomCat]

6. We needed at least 90 senators more like him, not 1 less.

Damn It! :grr:

He was one hell of a Senator. I hope he finds a way to remain outspoken and influential in government reform.

[tomp]

7. the progressive movement within the democratic party has failed.

we need a progressive movement without the democratic party.

the fact that feingold doesn't see this and say indicates to me he's not as progressive as he's touted to be.

[cantbeserious]

8. I Agree - Apparently There Are Some Lines That Cannot Be Crossed Else

The corporate Democratic party will take umbrage and retaliate.

[malaise]

9. Feingold - a politician with convictions

Russ :yourock:

[vssmith]

10. The corporate powers took the jobs overseas reducing tax revenue and...

now they call on the little guy to reduce to the resulting debt by lowering our pensions and social security.

They want to take us back to a feudal society--just call me a serf.

[katty]

11. Russ, we will miss you

[Hubert Flottz]

12. K&R

I think Russ would do a better job than Obama...

[Kermitt Gribble]

13. Can't rec this enough!

You will be sorely missed, Senator Feingold. How about starting a worker's party?

[Poboy]

14. Recommend

[grahamhgreen]

15. He should primary Obama, or at least flirt with it, it will give him and

Progressives a national, media amplified voice that we desperately need if our ideas are to be come part of the national dialog.

[geek tragedy]

21. Feingold rejects your premise.

You've never been cautious about suggesting that this president has missed the mark, not just on trade but on a host of economic issues. Yet you reject talk of a Democratic primary challenge that might press Obama on some of these issues. Why?

I'm going to be supporting President Obama. I don't see it as productive to go after, and basically make it very difficult for, somebody to be re-elected who I think has, at least in a number of areas, some progressive instincts. I think there's still great opportunity for him. So I'm not one who believes that a primary challenge that would weaken him in a serious way is a good idea. Now, I understand some people are of the opinion that a challenge would strengthen him; but I'm a little bit skeptical. I look at these Republican candidates and I know pretty well who I want to be president. You know, this is serious business, when you see what these people want to do. You give them a president, and we are really in trouble.

How should progressives relate to Obama? What's the best way to influence him?

I think we need to be very vocal. We can respect him and also indicate a desire that he move more strongly in certain areas, such as civil liberties. We can do it in a way that makes it clear we are not trying to harm the presidency but that we're trying to make sure that the base of the party and the progressive movement is motivated for this re-election. Because it needs to be. The other side is going to be very excited about 2012. I hope the White House understands that progressives have to be excited too. That will require a real effort to take some chances by moving in a more progressive manner on certain issues. I don't think we should be shy about saying that. It's not particularly helpful to talk about how we are disappointed. I don't think that accomplishes much. What we have to talk about is what the president needs to do to excite progressives. What he and his people need to recognize is the sincerity of the appeals for him to move in a more progressive direction on issues that are so important not just to progressives but to the country.

[stevenleser]

22. "We can respect him" That is where his DU critics and other progressive critics FAIL n/t

[grahamhgreen]

24. I respect him, but I want to push Obama to be a great agent for change, which is

what he asked us to do.

[grahamhgreen]

23. Unfortunately. "What we have to talk about is what the president needs to do to excite progressives

I hope the President does something in addition to DADT and Student Loans.

If he goes after Social Security tomorrow night, it will cost him the election.

[democrank]

16. Truth-teller.

We need more of them and less excuses.

[Vidar]

17. K&R.

[JDPriestly]

18. I hope that Feingold and Kucinich will emerge as the two progressive

leaders.

[asthmaticeog]

19. He's right, but...

the differences between the conditions that sparked the last Progressive movement and today are HUGE. Then, Socialism was a viable and legitimate part of the national political discourse. Today it's a snarl word. Then, there was no national media, and news was READ, not broadcast, so a small press or pamphleteer (let's consider that roughly equivalent to a blog today) stood a chance of having its voice heard without being totally drowned out by the size of the big guy. Now, those kinds of voices are much more easily marginalized, by incredibly powerful media with global reach and a self-interest in confining the terms of policy discussion, to the point where the best the little guys can hope for is Cassandra status, or a platform from which to merely vent to the aether. Finally, 100 years ago there were no iPods or smartphones, no Wiis or PS3s, no 1000 channels of cable - hell, NO TELEVISION AT ALL! Our utter enchanted delight with all these toys is keeping us down just as surely as the corporations who build them for us are. That's what keeps us on the couch instead of out in the streets, that's what keeps bankers heads obscured in plumes of cigar smoke instead of being impaled on pikes all up and down Wall Street to serve as a fucking lesson to the next generation of greedy shitstains who'd plunder the fruits of our work. We don't fight back because OOH SHINY! Russ is right, but THAT'S what a new Progressive movement would have to overcome. I have no idea how that could happen.

[leftstreet]

25. True. It's the Gilded Age without an organized Left

No organized Labor, nothin nada

[hfojvt]

20. dude, commuting from Middleton to Milwaukee?

that's just crazy. He couldn't get a job in Madtown?

I hope he's not teaching more than one day a week.