>> If I accept that I live on planet Earth, am I taking the status quo for granted? If I accept that 2 + 2 = 4, am I taking the status quo for granted?<<
yes, you are. And it's a generally good thing. The laws of physics and mathematics can't be changed (or else they wouldn't be "laws"). so you should take them for granted. On the other hand, if you take the earth for granted in the wrong way (e.g., by pumping greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere), people and a lot of natural species will suffer from your complacency. In any event, this comment is a non sequitur (i.e., totally irrelevant), since by "status quo" I meant the _political-economic_ balance of power. The balance of political and economic power is not a fact of nature.(Seeing politics or economics as immutable facts of nature seems a classic definition of "ideology.") >> If I accept that policies in Washington are determined by Democrats and Republicans, am I taking the status quo for granted?<< Since this is not an immutable fact, there are different _ways_ to take this fact for granted. One can see it the way political operatives and lobbyists see it, i.e., as a complex institution that can be used to promote one's career and the interest of one's financial masters. Alternatively, one can try to influence political events by using one's status to influence political and economic forces outside the beltway in order to change the balance of power. In the fun TV series "House of Cards," we can see both. The hero, Congresscritter Frank Underwood, "plays the game" in order to rise to the top of the political hierarchy. But he also uses his power and influence to undermine the teachers' union, which would (all else constant) encourage a political shift to the right on labor issues. Someone on the left might use his or her position, for example, to try to influence popular opinion so that people don't accept the "Israel Good/Palestinians Bad" bleat that the media sheep and politicians encourage. With enough popular opinion breaking with the official consensus, either the consensus will change or there will be serious political conflict. >> If I accept that it matters who gets elected to Congress, am I taking the status quo for granted?<< of course it matters who gets elected. But as before, there are different ways to respond. See above. On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Robert Naiman <[email protected]>wrote: > If I accept that I live on planet Earth, am I taking the status quo for > granted? If I accept that 2 + 2 = 4, am I taking the status quo for granted? > > If I accept that policies in Washington are determined by Democrats and > Republicans, am I taking the status quo for granted? > > If I accept that it matters who gets elected to Congress, am I taking the > status quo for granted? > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why the sectarian practice of calling people names because you don't like >> their political slant? (here, calling members Occupy "ultraleft" seems >> sectarian at best.) If you don't like them, you should simply call them >> "assholes" and move on. On a forum like pen-l, it's appropriate to provide >> some sort of intellectual justification for your disdain instead. And I >> don't see why you see Occupy as having faded. It's not like they've become >> apparatchiks for some politician. >> >> anyway, asking again: what kind of politics are we interested in? those >> that take the status quo for granted? >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Robert Naiman < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I oppose your Procrustean distinction. #occupy was heterogeneous. The >>> majority were for political engagement. The minority ultraleft faction was >>> against political engagement. The minority ultraleft faction eventually won >>> out, as it often does in such situations, by its greater ability to endure >>> long meetings, engage in personal attacks, etc. That's a key reason #occupy >>> faded, because the meetings were captured by the ultraleft. Normal people >>> gave up and drifted away. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> what is "politics" as used in the phrase "political engagement"? is it >>>> lobbying based on the existing balance of power (kissing up to in-power >>>> politicians to get favors, etc.) or is it does it involve efforts to change >>>> the balance of political power (as with the Occupy movement)? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Robert Naiman < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think your diagnosis is faulty. I think the key problem is that the >>>>> "Left" doesn't believe in political engagement. It believes in impotent >>>>> complaining. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> it's true. So much of the "Left" has become Democratic Party drones >>>>>> -- following the Party Line and chanting about the "lesser of two evils" >>>>>> -- >>>>>> that the "Left" may be an endangered species. But that doesn't mean that >>>>>> it >>>>>> (unlike an actual species) can't revive. the Obama/GOP austerity program >>>>>> could spark a new progressive movement of some sort that refuses to be >>>>>> co-opted. Maybe the Occupy movement? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Robert Naiman < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> This is the moment of truth. Now we'll find out if America has a >>>>>>> Left or not. If America has a Left, chained CPI can be stopped. >>>>>>> Otherwise, >>>>>>> the notion that America has a Left will from now on always be a bad >>>>>>> joke. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Jim Devine <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and some people hoped he was the new FDR? if "we're all >>>>>>>> Keynesians," he's an exception. >>>>>>>> [from >>>>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/us/social-programs-face-cutback-in-obama-budget.html >>>>>>>> ] >>>>>>>> Obama Budget to Include Cuts to Programs in Hopes of Deal By JACKIE >>>>>>>> CALMES<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/jackie_calmes/index.html> >>>>>>>> Published: >>>>>>>> April 5, 2013 >>>>>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/us/social-programs-face-cutback-in-obama-budget.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130405&_r=0#commentsContainer> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WASHINGTON — President Obama next week will take the political risk >>>>>>>> of formally proposing cuts to Social >>>>>>>> Security<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/social_security_us/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>and >>>>>>>> Medicare<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/medicare/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>in >>>>>>>> his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to >>>>>>>> compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term >>>>>>>> deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday >>>>>>>> will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual >>>>>>>> presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on >>>>>>>> arrival. >>>>>>>> Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to >>>>>>>> Speaker >>>>>>>> John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned >>>>>>>> negotiations >>>>>>>> in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy >>>>>>>> individuals and some corporations. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Congressional Republicans have dug in against any new tax revenues >>>>>>>> after higher taxes for the affluent were approved at the start of the >>>>>>>> year. >>>>>>>> The administration’s hope is to create cracks in Republicans’ antitax >>>>>>>> resistance, especially in the Senate, as constituents complain about >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> across-the-board cuts in military and domestic programs that took >>>>>>>> effect >>>>>>>> March 1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Obama’s proposed deficit reduction would replace those cuts. >>>>>>>> And if Republicans continue to resist the president, the White House >>>>>>>> believes that most Americans will blame them for the fiscal paralysis. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Besides the tax increases that most Republicans continue to oppose, >>>>>>>> Mr. Obama’s >>>>>>>> budget<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/federal_budget_us/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>will >>>>>>>> propose a new inflation formula that would have the effect of reducing >>>>>>>> cost-of-living payments for Social Security benefits, though with >>>>>>>> financial >>>>>>>> protections for low-income and very old beneficiaries, administration >>>>>>>> officials said. The idea, known as chained C.P.I., has infuriated some >>>>>>>> Democrats and advocacy groups to Mr. Obama’s left, and they have >>>>>>>> already >>>>>>>> mobilized in opposition. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As Mr. Obama has before, his budget documents will emphasize that >>>>>>>> he would support the cost-of-living change, as well as other reductions >>>>>>>> that Republicans have called for in the popular programs for older >>>>>>>> Americans, only if Republicans agree to additional taxes on the >>>>>>>> wealthy and >>>>>>>> infrastructure investments that the president called for in last year’s >>>>>>>> offer to Mr. Boehner. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mr. Obama will propose other spending and tax credit initiatives, >>>>>>>> including aid for states to make free prekindergarten education >>>>>>>> available >>>>>>>> nationwide — a priority outlined in his State of the Union >>>>>>>> address<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/state_of_the_union_message_us/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier>in >>>>>>>> February. He will propose to pay for it by raising federal taxes on >>>>>>>> cigarettes and other tobacco products. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> “The president has made clear that he is willing to compromise and >>>>>>>> do tough things to reduce the deficits, but only in the context of a >>>>>>>> package like this one that has balance and includes revenues from the >>>>>>>> wealthiest Americans and that is designed to promote economic growth,” >>>>>>>> said >>>>>>>> a senior administration official, who, like others, declined to be >>>>>>>> identified confirming details about the coming budget. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> “That means,” the official added, “that the things like C.P.I. that >>>>>>>> Republican leaders have pushed hard for will only be accepted if >>>>>>>> Congressional Republicans are willing to do more on revenues.” >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your >>>>>>>> own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> pen-l mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Robert Naiman >>>>>>> Policy Director >>>>>>> Just Foreign Policy >>>>>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> pen-l mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your >>>>>> own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> pen-l mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Robert Naiman >>>>> Policy Director >>>>> Just Foreign Policy >>>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> pen-l mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own >>>> way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> pen-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> [email protected] >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pen-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own >> way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pen-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >> >> > > > -- > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > -- Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
