Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Jim Worthy]

Keith,

Indeed we do share much and I appreciate that. :-) As to the future, we will
keep it up.

Jim

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hi Jim
>
> >Keith,
> >
> >Take it personally? Of course I do, but not in an offended sense.
>
> :-) That's cool.
>
> >  >Not to be disparaging, but are you holding his feet to the fire? Are
> >>you getting any results?
> >
> >Yes, I did and so did many others I know personally if by that you mean
> did
> >we take the next step and voice our opinion on appointments and policy
> after
> >the election. Not that it had much impact. Some, but not much. The
> Democrats
> >think we are safe votes if the alternative is neocon psychopathy.
> >
> >The nettlesome thing is that we live in a republic, not a democracy. We
> vote
> >for candidates and only in rare occasions on policy and never at the
> Federal
> >level. Once voted in, they have an annoying habit of doing what they want
> >and if one doesn't like it then the fires of retribution are pretty feeble
> >at that point.
> >
> >>If you're disgruntled that means you're awake now,
> >>excellent, but were you awake then?
> >
> >Yes, I think so. I grew up in Mississippi during the civil rights movement
> >in the fifties and sixties. I am white but I saw first hand the brutal
> >divide between the ideal rule of law and the fascist, crypto or otherwise,
> >behavior that is possible on the street. That has a way of wrenching one's
> >paradigm permanently.
>
> Indeed it does. I can also testify to that.
>
> >Vietnam and Nixon cemented the deal. The financial
> >collapse and bailouts confirmed it.
> >
> >In the Obama campaign, I never bought into the 'here comes the promised
> >land" level of rapture some seem to think we all campaigned under. Obama
> >wasn't my first choice, Kucinich was, because I, and others, aren't
> content
> >to accept the status quo on Military Commissions, gun violence,
> >assassination as a foreign policy (we must kill Osama Bin laden to stop
> >terrorism), preventive detentions,  'clean coal", or a host of other
> policy
> >positions. But again, we vote for candidates, not policy, and there is
> >little question he was better than McCain.
> >
> >So, you are right when you say that that is only half the job. And we've
> >been doing the other half for years. But I, for one, haven't found the
> magic
> >bullet that "forces the White House" to do what we want. If we mobilized
> >like the Iranians, we might scare them enough to at least take notice
>
> Yes, but you'd (plural) have to keep it up. Constant vigilance!
>
> Noam Chomsky: "What Next? The Elections, the Economy, and the World"
> November 24, 2008
> <
> http://www.democracynow.org/2008/11/24/noam_chomsky_what_next_the_elections
> >
>
> You say "like the Iranians", why not like the 60s? Or like Seattle in
> 1999? Or the war protests?
>
> >but I
> >can tell you from personal experience that visits to Congressmen, rallies,
> >petitions, emails, phone calls, letters to the editor, ad nauseum
> (starting
> >immediately after the election, at Obama's invitation), are like flea
> bites
> >on elephant hide. The only thing left is to continue to build it ourselves
> >and lead from behind.
> >
> >>You certainly weren't offered either of those.
> >
> >Maybe not, but "she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10
> >(or 15
> >or 20) years ago at least. " sure sounds condescending to me.
>
> I don't know if she voted for Obama. Chris wrote "while i commend
> sarah for finally waking up, she should have stopped hitting the
> snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15 or 20) years ago at least", referring to
> Sara Robinson, author of one of the links I posted in the original
> message:
>
> Fascist America: Are We There Yet?
> August 9, 2009
> by Sara Robinson
> 
>
> She doesn't even mention Obama.
>
> >I may be babbling somewhere on the fringe on this topic but creating a
> >social fabric wholecloth or a gestalt seems to be no easy task, regardless
> >of one's will or intentions. I don't know what it is like in other
> political
> >systems but steering a new course with the US ship of state is ponderous.
> >The civic id is powerful and the predators well entrenched. I would love
> to
> >accelerate the pax Americana but can't seem to lay my hands on the fairy
> >dust at the moment.
> >
> >In the meantime, we will keep creating what beauty we can in our sphere of
> >influence and stoking our ambitions.  If someone has a better plan, let's
> >hear it.
>
> I reckon the only better plan is for everybody to do that. I think
> most of them would be doing it, but for the consent manufacturing
> industry - of course it's not the only obstacle, but I think it's the
> most important one. The Chomsky piece is worth a read.
>
> Thanks Jim, I think we share a lot of things.
>
> All best
>
> Keith
>
>
> >Jim
> >
> >On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Keith Addison
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> >> 

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Jim

>Keith,
>
>Take it personally? Of course I do, but not in an offended sense.

:-) That's cool.

>  >Not to be disparaging, but are you holding his feet to the fire? Are
>>you getting any results?
>
>Yes, I did and so did many others I know personally if by that you mean did
>we take the next step and voice our opinion on appointments and policy after
>the election. Not that it had much impact. Some, but not much. The Democrats
>think we are safe votes if the alternative is neocon psychopathy.
>
>The nettlesome thing is that we live in a republic, not a democracy. We vote
>for candidates and only in rare occasions on policy and never at the Federal
>level. Once voted in, they have an annoying habit of doing what they want
>and if one doesn't like it then the fires of retribution are pretty feeble
>at that point.
>
>>If you're disgruntled that means you're awake now,
>>excellent, but were you awake then?
>
>Yes, I think so. I grew up in Mississippi during the civil rights movement
>in the fifties and sixties. I am white but I saw first hand the brutal
>divide between the ideal rule of law and the fascist, crypto or otherwise,
>behavior that is possible on the street. That has a way of wrenching one's
>paradigm permanently.

Indeed it does. I can also testify to that.

>Vietnam and Nixon cemented the deal. The financial
>collapse and bailouts confirmed it.
>
>In the Obama campaign, I never bought into the 'here comes the promised
>land" level of rapture some seem to think we all campaigned under. Obama
>wasn't my first choice, Kucinich was, because I, and others, aren't content
>to accept the status quo on Military Commissions, gun violence,
>assassination as a foreign policy (we must kill Osama Bin laden to stop
>terrorism), preventive detentions,  'clean coal", or a host of other policy
>positions. But again, we vote for candidates, not policy, and there is
>little question he was better than McCain.
>
>So, you are right when you say that that is only half the job. And we've
>been doing the other half for years. But I, for one, haven't found the magic
>bullet that "forces the White House" to do what we want. If we mobilized
>like the Iranians, we might scare them enough to at least take notice

Yes, but you'd (plural) have to keep it up. Constant vigilance!

Noam Chomsky: "What Next? The Elections, the Economy, and the World"
November 24, 2008


You say "like the Iranians", why not like the 60s? Or like Seattle in 
1999? Or the war protests?

>but I
>can tell you from personal experience that visits to Congressmen, rallies,
>petitions, emails, phone calls, letters to the editor, ad nauseum (starting
>immediately after the election, at Obama's invitation), are like flea bites
>on elephant hide. The only thing left is to continue to build it ourselves
>and lead from behind.
>
>>You certainly weren't offered either of those.
>
>Maybe not, but "she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10
>(or 15
>or 20) years ago at least. " sure sounds condescending to me.

I don't know if she voted for Obama. Chris wrote "while i commend 
sarah for finally waking up, she should have stopped hitting the 
snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15 or 20) years ago at least", referring to 
Sara Robinson, author of one of the links I posted in the original 
message:

Fascist America: Are We There Yet?
August 9, 2009
by Sara Robinson


She doesn't even mention Obama.

>I may be babbling somewhere on the fringe on this topic but creating a
>social fabric wholecloth or a gestalt seems to be no easy task, regardless
>of one's will or intentions. I don't know what it is like in other political
>systems but steering a new course with the US ship of state is ponderous.
>The civic id is powerful and the predators well entrenched. I would love to
>accelerate the pax Americana but can't seem to lay my hands on the fairy
>dust at the moment.
>
>In the meantime, we will keep creating what beauty we can in our sphere of
>influence and stoking our ambitions.  If someone has a better plan, let's
>hear it.

I reckon the only better plan is for everybody to do that. I think 
most of them would be doing it, but for the consent manufacturing 
industry - of course it's not the only obstacle, but I think it's the 
most important one. The Chomsky piece is worth a read.

Thanks Jim, I think we share a lot of things.

All best

Keith


>Jim
>
>On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Keith Addison
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>  Hi Jim
>>
>>  >"...but I think if a disgruntled Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took
>>  >another look at the
>>  >election and since, it might wake him up a bit."
>>  >
>>  >Speaking as one of those disgruntled Obama voters, I think I am more or
>>  less
>>  >awake. And also not sitting on my ass, either. Some of us are discouraged,
>>  >yes, but not so much so that we are not doing anything about it

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Chris

Quite so.

> i think what keith really meant re holding obama's feet to the
>fire, was mass action.

Yes.

For instance, Israel's assault on Gaza at the end of last year 
probably outraged Americans about as much as everyone else.

FRIDAY, JANUARY 02, 2009
"First Poll on US Opinion on Gaza: Democratic Politicians Ignore 
Public Opinion"


What would Obama do about it?

>>"With the American political establishment firmly behind Israel's
>>attack, and Obama's foreign policy team heavily weighted with
>>pro-Israel insiders like Dennis Ross and Hillary Clinton, any efforts
>>to hold Israel accountable in the United States will depend upon
>>American citizens mobilizing a major grassroots effort behind a new
>>foreign policy that will not tolerate any violations of international
>>law, including those by Israel, and will immediately work towards
>>ending Israel's siege of Gaza and ending Israel's occupation."
>>-- War of Choice: How Israel Manufactured the Gaza Escalation
>>Steve Niva | January 7, 2009 

Also:

>"Obama Won't Have to Kiss AIPAC's Ring -- Progressive Alternative to
>Hawkish Mideast Policies Emerges"
>By Alexander Zaitchik, AlterNet
>Posted on January 12, 2009, Printed on January 12, 2009
>
>
>He'll kiss it anyway though...

:-(

>there has been a remarkable lack of it.  did
>obama's campaign machinery just chew up all the different grass roots
>groups that gravitated to him?  imho the only way there will be even a
>slim hope of seeing anything that resembles the kind of change obama
>spoke of while campaigning, is a sustained campaign of mass action.
>on a scale similar to the marches against the second iraq war, but
>much more drawn out.  like from now until the mid-term elections at
>least.  and obama has to be constantly reminded that these throngs of
>marchers represent the votes he will lose next time around if he
>doesn't deliver.

The Noam Chomsky piece I mentioned (other email) puts it in context, IMHO.


I'll post it in full.

Best

Keith


>"just another step in the maturation of human affairs.  Maybe it will
>get bad. . .but we will persist. . . ."  don't be so sure.  there are
>two very crucial things we mustn't forget.  firstly, that neither
>germany nor japan were undisputed hegemonic superpowers with global
>reach, nor had they nuclear arsenals.  secondly, the only reason the
>nazis lost their grip on power was because they were utterly defeated
>militarily.  if the day of "righteous tyrrany" comes to this country,
>it will not just run its course.  it could very well be the end of all
>of us.  many
>people nowadays have this notion about fascist germany along the lines
>of  "well, it was
>unfortunate, but we survived it, and we learned from it."  but did we
>really?  does the grotesque history of carnage of the past 60 years
>tell you so?  does this butchery, much of it perpretated either
>directly by our own government, or at its behest by our client states,
>honor those tens of millions who died so that we could "learn"?
>there's no reason every war or bloody conflict shouldn't be the last,
>but we just keep right on going.  of course, on one level "we" isn't
>really we, us, you and me.  it's the puppetmasters.  and they're
>really good at what they do.  but on another level, we really does
>mean all of us.  as long as we fail to effectively oppose the kinds of
>policies which use and perpetuate war and violence as a means (and for
>some, like the military industrial complex, war in itself is not the
>means, but the end),
>then we too are responsible.  don't misunderstand me, i think the
>ability to view things from a philosophically detached perspective is
>a good thing.
>   but it can also be a hindrance. *<>*<>*<>* i started writing this
>earlier today but had to set it aside for a few hours.  i have since
>read your last contribution and it seems pretty clear you understand
>this.  i think what keith really meant re holding obama's feet to the
>fire, was mass action.  there has been a remarkable lack of it.  did
>obama's campaign machinery just chew up all the different grass roots
>groups that gravitated to him?  imho the only way there will be even a
>slim hope of seeing anything that resembles the kind of change obama
>spoke of while campaigning, is a sustained campaign of mass action.
>on a scale similar to the marches against the second iraq war, but
>much more drawn out.  like from now until the mid-term elections at
>least.  and obama has to be constantly reminded that these throngs of
>marchers represent the votes he will lose next time around if he
>doesn't deliver.  you said you've been doing some things locally.  i'd
>love to hear more about it.  feel free to contact me offlist.


___
Biofuel 

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Chris Burck]

"just another step in the maturation of human affairs.  Maybe it will
get bad. . .but we will persist. . . ."  don't be so sure.  there are
two very crucial things we mustn't forget.  firstly, that neither
germany nor japan were undisputed hegemonic superpowers with global
reach, nor had they nuclear arsenals.  secondly, the only reason the
nazis lost their grip on power was because they were utterly defeated
militarily.  if the day of "righteous tyrrany" comes to this country,
it will not just run its course.  it could very well be the end of all
of us.  many
people nowadays have this notion about fascist germany along the lines
of  "well, it was
unfortunate, but we survived it, and we learned from it."  but did we
really?  does the grotesque history of carnage of the past 60 years
tell you so?  does this butchery, much of it perpretated either
directly by our own government, or at its behest by our client states,
honor those tens of millions who died so that we could "learn"?
there's no reason every war or bloody conflict shouldn't be the last,
but we just keep right on going.  of course, on one level "we" isn't
really we, us, you and me.  it's the puppetmasters.  and they're
really good at what they do.  but on another level, we really does
mean all of us.  as long as we fail to effectively oppose the kinds of
policies which use and perpetuate war and violence as a means (and for
some, like the military industrial complex, war in itself is not the
means, but the end),
then we too are responsible.  don't misunderstand me, i think the
ability to view things from a philosophically detached perspective is
a good thing.
  but it can also be a hindrance. *<>*<>*<>* i started writing this
earlier today but had to set it aside for a few hours.  i have since
read your last contribution and it seems pretty clear you understand
this.  i think what keith really meant re holding obama's feet to the
fire, was mass action.  there has been a remarkable lack of it.  did
obama's campaign machinery just chew up all the different grass roots
groups that gravitated to him?  imho the only way there will be even a
slim hope of seeing anything that resembles the kind of change obama
spoke of while campaigning, is a sustained campaign of mass action.
on a scale similar to the marches against the second iraq war, but
much more drawn out.  like from now until the mid-term elections at
least.  and obama has to be constantly reminded that these throngs of
marchers represent the votes he will lose next time around if he
doesn't deliver.  you said you've been doing some things locally.  i'd
love to hear more about it.  feel free to contact me offlist.

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Jim Worthy]

Keith,

Take it personally? Of course I do, but not in an offended sense.

>Not to be disparaging, but are you holding his feet to the fire? Are
>you getting any results?

Yes, I did and so did many others I know personally if by that you mean did
we take the next step and voice our opinion on appointments and policy after
the election. Not that it had much impact. Some, but not much. The Democrats
think we are safe votes if the alternative is neocon psychopathy.

The nettlesome thing is that we live in a republic, not a democracy. We vote
for candidates and only in rare occasions on policy and never at the Federal
level. Once voted in, they have an annoying habit of doing what they want
and if one doesn't like it then the fires of retribution are pretty feeble
at that point.

>If you're disgruntled that means you're awake now,
>excellent, but were you awake then?

Yes, I think so. I grew up in Mississippi during the civil rights movement
in the fifties and sixties. I am white but I saw first hand the brutal
divide between the ideal rule of law and the fascist, crypto or otherwise,
behavior that is possible on the street. That has a way of wrenching one's
paradigm permanently. Vietnam and Nixon cemented the deal. The financial
collapse and bailouts confirmed it.

In the Obama campaign, I never bought into the 'here comes the promised
land" level of rapture some seem to think we all campaigned under. Obama
wasn't my first choice, Kucinich was, because I, and others, aren't content
to accept the status quo on Military Commissions, gun violence,
assassination as a foreign policy (we must kill Osama Bin laden to stop
terrorism), preventive detentions,  'clean coal", or a host of other policy
positions. But again, we vote for candidates, not policy, and there is
little question he was better than McCain.

So, you are right when you say that that is only half the job. And we've
been doing the other half for years. But I, for one, haven't found the magic
bullet that "forces the White House" to do what we want. If we mobilized
like the Iranians, we might scare them enough to at least take notice but I
can tell you from personal experience that visits to Congressmen, rallies,
petitions, emails, phone calls, letters to the editor, ad nauseum (starting
immediately after the election, at Obama's invitation), are like flea bites
on elephant hide. The only thing left is to continue to build it ourselves
and lead from behind.

>You certainly weren't offered either of those.

Maybe not, but "she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10
(or 15
or 20) years ago at least. " sure sounds condescending to me.

I may be babbling somewhere on the fringe on this topic but creating a
social fabric wholecloth or a gestalt seems to be no easy task, regardless
of one's will or intentions. I don't know what it is like in other political
systems but steering a new course with the US ship of state is ponderous.
The civic id is powerful and the predators well entrenched. I would love to
accelerate the pax Americana but can't seem to lay my hands on the fairy
dust at the moment.

In the meantime, we will keep creating what beauty we can in our sphere of
influence and stoking our ambitions.  If someone has a better plan, let's
hear it.

Jim

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hi Jim
>
> >"...but I think if a disgruntled Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took
> >another look at the
> >election and since, it might wake him up a bit."
> >
> >Speaking as one of those disgruntled Obama voters, I think I am more or
> less
> >awake. And also not sitting on my ass, either. Some of us are discouraged,
> >yes, but not so much so that we are not doing anything about it.
>
> Not to be disparaging, but are you holding his feet to the fire? Are
> you getting any results? So many people were saying it at the time,
> that that's what the voters would have to do if they wanted any
> delivery on all these promises of change, or Obama would respond to
> the campaign contributors instead, business-as-usual. It didn't
> happen. I still think it could have happened at the time, if the
> voters had grasped the nettle, but they didn't. The bulk of them sat
> back and waited, and then they got "dismayed" when it wasn't working
> out the way they'd thought it would. Or hoped it would. Sorry, but I
> have to say that anybody who didn't expect business-as-usual had to
> be asleep. If you're disgruntled that means you're awake now,
> excellent, but were you awake then?
>
> I'm not saying people shouldn't have voted for Obama, by the way, of
> course they should have, and they had to vote for him anyway even
> knowing he'd already been bought and paid for, in order to not elect
> McCain and Palin. But that was only half the job.
>
> >Speaking for myself, one thing we are doing is to build power locally. We
> >are connecting to local networks, finding allies, articulating
> alternatives,
> >and relying on ourselves

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Chris

>you're right about paxton.  it has it's flaws, but still a good
>overall analysis.

I think you have to be eclectic, flaws and all. It's not easy to find 
a one-size-fits-all BS detector these days, the art and science of BS 
is too refined for that. Some people do very well, a lot more do very 
well with some things but not so well with others. None of them 
exactly stands out amid all the noise.

>it's good that the press points out the pre- and
>post-innauguration obama disconnects.  i only wish it weren't only (or
>virtually so) the so-called lefties they bothered to critique.  i was
>watching the coverage of the townhall "meetings" the other day and i
>couldn't help thinking of the john kerry tasering incident in florida.
>  if that poor fellow had behaved even remotely like these screamers
>have been allowed to carry on, he'd have been gunned down on the spot.
>  with prejudice.  if, when gwb was potus, someone had attempted to
>approach within three miles of a presidential townhall meeting with a
>gun strapped to his leg, they would have called in an airstrike on
>him.  these are also very serious disconnects.  in fact, for very
>serious and important that "the obama disconnect" is, these others are
>even more so.  the message is very clear.  unmistakeable.  unspoken.
>understood by all.  if you want to speak about public affairs/public
>policy from a place of compassion, humanity, reason, then get ready
>for the takedown.  but if you're all about hate, well, they'll hold
>the door open for you and beg you to let them get you a refreshment.

Indeed, that's the norm now. It's also part of the USA's disconnect 
with the rest of the world. Yet a lot of polls find that most 
Americans are compassionate, humane and reasonable people, left of 
centre, progressive, it's even said. I think that's so, yet the norm 
is far to the right. A few writers have compared it with the Nixon 
era to demonstrate that. How did it get there, exactly? All by 
itself? Whatever, it's certainly a serious disconnect.

Business-as-usual with Obama seems to have enshrined a few new norms. 
The financial sector is immensely more ravenous than it's ever been 
before, that's now a norm, Iraq and Afghanistan are a norm, the war 
on terror is a norm, torture is a norm, illegal surveillance of 
Americans is a norm. Industrialised healthcare will soon be a norm - 
it must seem a paragon of enlightenment compared with what the 
deathers are screaming. How convenient. At the same time as 
negotiating with the White House, the pharmaceutical industry has 
been stoking up the Town Hall Riots and the deathers: 
. Then they sit 
down to tea with Obama, and he doesn't know it? Hm.

"A full 52% of independent voters, the critical voting bloc that 
propelled Obama to the White House last fall, gave the President's 
handling of health care the thumbs down, while just 34% approve." 

 
As if he could care. He might care a little more if they went out on 
the streets and stayed there, and not only over healthcare reform 
[sic], but one wouldn't want to suggest a thing like that because 
some No-Such-Agency in Washington might construe it as seditious and 
add your name to the FBI's list of terrorist suspects, along with the 
other 900,000-odd people already on it, mostly good folks, dissidents 
exercising their rights, or complete innocents, none charged or found 
guilty of anything, and with no redress. It seems Robert's on one 
such list, for heaven's sake:

>All of my "holding politicians into accountability" has apparently
>landed me on someone's list, so that every time I cross the border into
>my own country, I get harassed.  Every time I send a parcel across the
>border, it gets opened.  They act with impunity because we'll accept
>whatever drivel they give us.  My mother likes to say: "The people get
>the government they deserve." But I keep wondering what I've done to
>deserve THIS!

And so on.

Quite a few Americans wrote to me as the events that followed 9/11 
were unfolding, because they wanted to talk with a foreigner. They 
were aghast at what was happening. Most of them mentioned 
Krystallnacht, and most of them said they felt very isolated and 
alone.

>cryptofascism. . .aint it grand?

Ain't it just. Though maybe it'll go on alternating with the 
in-your-face brand, like a good cop-bad cop routine.

Best

Keith


___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Jim

>"...but I think if a disgruntled Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took
>another look at the
>election and since, it might wake him up a bit."
>
>Speaking as one of those disgruntled Obama voters, I think I am more or less
>awake. And also not sitting on my ass, either. Some of us are discouraged,
>yes, but not so much so that we are not doing anything about it.

Not to be disparaging, but are you holding his feet to the fire? Are 
you getting any results? So many people were saying it at the time, 
that that's what the voters would have to do if they wanted any 
delivery on all these promises of change, or Obama would respond to 
the campaign contributors instead, business-as-usual. It didn't 
happen. I still think it could have happened at the time, if the 
voters had grasped the nettle, but they didn't. The bulk of them sat 
back and waited, and then they got "dismayed" when it wasn't working 
out the way they'd thought it would. Or hoped it would. Sorry, but I 
have to say that anybody who didn't expect business-as-usual had to 
be asleep. If you're disgruntled that means you're awake now, 
excellent, but were you awake then?

I'm not saying people shouldn't have voted for Obama, by the way, of 
course they should have, and they had to vote for him anyway even 
knowing he'd already been bought and paid for, in order to not elect 
McCain and Palin. But that was only half the job.

>Speaking for myself, one thing we are doing is to build power locally. We
>are connecting to local networks, finding allies, articulating alternatives,
>and relying on ourselves.

Yes, real answers. But, on the other hand, that's also 
business-as-usual in a way - not being cynical or sceptical about it 
at all, it's absolutely essential and can't happen soon enough, IMHO, 
but that's been the work in hand for anyone with their eyes open 
since long before anyone heard of Obama. I don't see it as a direct 
response to Obama's non-delivery. How will it help to force the White 
House in the right direction on foreign policy, occupied Palestine, 
the war on terror, torture? And the rest. Tip of the iceberg:

Obama Seeks to Block Release of Abuse Photos
August 11, 2009


Target Of Obama-Era Rendition Alleges Torture
August 11, 2009


The Cheney-like Secrecy of the Obama White House
August 8, 2009


>It seems obvious that if we want to fight
>authoritarianism, we don't grant "them" the authority to determine the
>quality of our lives.

Hasn't it gone rather beyond that, for a great many people, if not 
the society in general?

>We need neither pity nor condescension.

You certainly weren't offered either of those. Nobody is to be blamed 
for not being immune to Madison Ave et al, nobody is to be blamed for 
raising their hopes, even if they're being manipulated by cynical 
interests who're just using them as a means to an end. Hope is a 
force for the good, hope is always better than no hope, I believe 
it's more powerful than disappointment, and that could help to hasten 
the undoing of the manipulators and their clients. They wouldn't see 
it coming, that and other things that together could mean their 
nemesis.

>What we are going through is just
>another step in the maturation of human affairs. Maybe it will get bad,
>maybe really bad, but we will persist and maybe learn something along the
>way.

I hope that's right, rather than "fool me once, fool me twice".

>We will keep up the pressure for sane public policy in the hope that some of
>it will take root, but we won't settle for that only.

Well said, strength to your arm.

>As to the "Damn, these guys are good." observation, they have an advantage
>over us.

I think the whipping up of hope among the Obama voters at the time 
and the whipping up of mindless rage in the right-wing lunatic fringe 
at the moment ultimately come from the same place.

>They don't have the constaints of attempting to speak truthfully,
>rationally, or with integrity.

Where's the truth, rationality or integrity in this: "Change!", 
"Change we can believe in"? Rationality I can see, but only behind 
it, not "in" it. (Damn, these guys are good.)

>Any rhetoric that works is OK. Personally,
>I'll accept the constraints.

Set your own constraints rather, as I'm sure you do.

Jim, none of this was meant personally, please don't take it that way.

All best

Keith


>It just feels better.
>
>Jim
>
>On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Keith Addison
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>  Hi Chris
>>
>>  You're quite right. Not glib, it's succinct.
>>
>>  >not to be too glib, but. . .while i commend sarah for finally waking
>>  >up, she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15
>>  >or 20) years ago at least.
>>
>>  :-) Minimum 28 years ago I think. Interesting, n

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Chris Burck]

you're right about paxton.  it has it's flaws, but still a good
overall analysis.  it's good that the press points out the pre- and
post-innauguration obama disconnects.  i only wish it weren't only (or
virtually so) the so-called lefties they bothered to critique.  i was
watching the coverage of the townhall "meetings" the other day and i
couldn't help thinking of the john kerry tasering incident in florida.
 if that poor fellow had behaved even remotely like these screamers
have been allowed to carry on, he'd have been gunned down on the spot.
 with prejudice.  if, when gwb was potus, someone had attempted to
approach within three miles of a presidential townhall meeting with a
gun strapped to his leg, they would have called in an airstrike on
him.  these are also very serious disconnects.  in fact, for very
serious and important that "the obama disconnect" is, these others are
even more so.  the message is very clear.  unmistakeable.  unspoken.
understood by all.  if you want to speak about public affairs/public
policy from a place of compassion, humanity, reason, then get ready
for the takedown.  but if you're all about hate, well, they'll hold
the door open for you and beg you to let them get you a refreshment.
cryptofascism. . .aint it grand?

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Jim Worthy]

"...but I think if a disgruntled Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took
another look at the
election and since, it might wake him up a bit."

Speaking as one of those disgruntled Obama voters, I think I am more or less
awake. And also not sitting on my ass, either. Some of us are discouraged,
yes, but not so much so that we are not doing anything about it.

Speaking for myself, one thing we are doing is to build power locally. We
are connecting to local networks, finding allies, articulating alternatives,
and relying on ourselves. It seems obvious that if we want to fight
authoritarianism, we don't grant "them" the authority to determine the
quality of our lives.

We need neither pity nor condescension. What we are going through is just
another step in the maturation of human affairs. Maybe it will get bad,
maybe really bad, but we will persist and maybe learn something along the
way.

We will keep up the pressure for sane public policy in the hope that some of
it will take root, but we won't settle for that only.

As to the "Damn, these guys are good." observation, they have an advantage
over us. They don't have the constaints of attempting to speak truthfully,
rationally, or with integrity. Any rhetoric that works is OK. Personally,
I'll accept the constraints. It just feels better.

Jim

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Keith Addison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hi Chris
>
> You're quite right. Not glib, it's succinct.
>
> >not to be too glib, but. . .while i commend sarah for finally waking
> >up, she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15
> >or 20) years ago at least.
>
> :-) Minimum 28 years ago I think. Interesting, nonetheless.
>
> >some of these signposts she's talking
> >about have been in evidence for at least that long.
>
> Indeed.
>
> >"now the guessing
> >game is over"?  gimme a break.  we're long past that point.  there are
> >problems with paxton as well, which is inevitable when you try to
> >frame a discussion of this topic within the sanitized limits of
> >puritanical, post-depression/-WWII/-mccarthy american political
> >language.  but also, i think he under-appreciates crypto-fascism,
> >which is plenty effective enough and meanwhile the majority of the
> >people are none the wiser.  which means it can go on virtually forever
> >without that pesky fourth and fifth stage disruption.
>
> But Paxton's framework can be useful in recognising crypto-fascism.
> For instance, there must be a lot of dismayed and dispirited recent
> voters in the US right now. So much dashed hope - hopes raised to a
> crescendo, used (spent, cashed in), and discarded, and all those
> promises broken. "Change!" What change has there been, other than the
> White House organic garden? Are the voters still waiting for change,
> or have they given up? The Obama White House acts as if the whole
> thing simply never happened and gets on with business-as-usual, in
> almost every sphere. The media (or some of them) duly note the
> disconnect, but nothing happens. Paxton has quite a lot to say about
> that kind of behaviour.
>
> The "Change!" voters don't see Obama as any kind of fascist, let
> alone perhaps a crypto one, but do they know what a fascist is? Maybe
> not, or perhaps probably not, the term is so denatured now that it
> probably doesn't mean much more than "nasty person" to most people.
>
> The current crescendo, the maddened mob of birthers and deathers in
> the opposite camp, are completely clueless about it, as with
> everything else. David Michael Green just commented: "What sort of
> powerful drugs does one have to be on to make the argument that this
> rather considerably conservative president is a socialist? And then
> to call him a fascist in your next breath, blissfully unaware that
> the chasm separating the two ideologies not only makes them wholly
> different, but, indeed, oppositional." - "My 1933 Nightmare", David
> Michael Green, August 11, 2009
> 
>
> "Ideology"? Well, never mind. On the other hand, for the voters to
> think this "rather considerably conservative president" was the
> messiah isn't that much less deluded. Spin is spin. The
> birther/deather nutters are beyond hope, but I think if a disgruntled
> Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took another look at the
> election and since, it might wake him up a bit.
>
> Green says: "Everybody talks about fascism nowadays, not least those
> on the right who remarkably manage to call Barack Obama a fascist in
> the same breath as they label him a socialist. The term has been
> beaten into near meaninglessness from ubiquitousness of application.
> (Could this be another extremely clever semantics ploy of the
> right-wing marketing machine, taking the term out of use now that it
> is legitimately applicable, by over- and ab-using it? Damn, these
> guys are good.)"
>
> I don't think he's necessarily being paranoid in the last bit, but he
> might not reach far enough in attr

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Chris

You're quite right. Not glib, it's succinct.

>not to be too glib, but. . .while i commend sarah for finally waking
>up, she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15
>or 20) years ago at least.

:-) Minimum 28 years ago I think. Interesting, nonetheless.

>some of these signposts she's talking
>about have been in evidence for at least that long.

Indeed.

>"now the guessing
>game is over"?  gimme a break.  we're long past that point.  there are
>problems with paxton as well, which is inevitable when you try to
>frame a discussion of this topic within the sanitized limits of
>puritanical, post-depression/-WWII/-mccarthy american political
>language.  but also, i think he under-appreciates crypto-fascism,
>which is plenty effective enough and meanwhile the majority of the
>people are none the wiser.  which means it can go on virtually forever
>without that pesky fourth and fifth stage disruption.

But Paxton's framework can be useful in recognising crypto-fascism. 
For instance, there must be a lot of dismayed and dispirited recent 
voters in the US right now. So much dashed hope - hopes raised to a 
crescendo, used (spent, cashed in), and discarded, and all those 
promises broken. "Change!" What change has there been, other than the 
White House organic garden? Are the voters still waiting for change, 
or have they given up? The Obama White House acts as if the whole 
thing simply never happened and gets on with business-as-usual, in 
almost every sphere. The media (or some of them) duly note the 
disconnect, but nothing happens. Paxton has quite a lot to say about 
that kind of behaviour.

The "Change!" voters don't see Obama as any kind of fascist, let 
alone perhaps a crypto one, but do they know what a fascist is? Maybe 
not, or perhaps probably not, the term is so denatured now that it 
probably doesn't mean much more than "nasty person" to most people.

The current crescendo, the maddened mob of birthers and deathers in 
the opposite camp, are completely clueless about it, as with 
everything else. David Michael Green just commented: "What sort of 
powerful drugs does one have to be on to make the argument that this 
rather considerably conservative president is a socialist? And then 
to call him a fascist in your next breath, blissfully unaware that 
the chasm separating the two ideologies not only makes them wholly 
different, but, indeed, oppositional." - "My 1933 Nightmare", David 
Michael Green, August 11, 2009 


"Ideology"? Well, never mind. On the other hand, for the voters to 
think this "rather considerably conservative president" was the 
messiah isn't that much less deluded. Spin is spin. The 
birther/deather nutters are beyond hope, but I think if a disgruntled 
Obama voter had a read of Paxton and took another look at the 
election and since, it might wake him up a bit.

Green says: "Everybody talks about fascism nowadays, not least those 
on the right who remarkably manage to call Barack Obama a fascist in 
the same breath as they label him a socialist. The term has been 
beaten into near meaninglessness from ubiquitousness of application. 
(Could this be another extremely clever semantics ploy of the 
right-wing marketing machine, taking the term out of use now that it 
is legitimately applicable, by over- and ab-using it? Damn, these 
guys are good.)"

I don't think he's necessarily being paranoid in the last bit, but he 
might not reach far enough in attributing it to the right-wing 
marketing machine, it goes deeper than that.

Green says: "There are many examples of this, but one of the most 
clever has been the defining of wholly corporate center-right 
political figures like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama as extreme 
leftists, and the defining of the mainstream media as hopelessly 
biased toward liberalism."

He adds: "The Democratic Party is nothing more than the sorta 
not-Republican Party, and stands for nothing other than a quieter and 
more slowly-unfolding version of the GOP's crimes."

In other words, the Bush-Cheney regime was a much faster and more 
in-your-face version of Clinton's crimes, and Obama is once again a 
quieter and slower version of the same thing. It has continuity, the 
crimes don't change.

I think sideshows like the current birther/deather fiasco are just a 
distraction, it works well, good cover for any crypto-fascists in the 
White House. Give Green a read and see how it distracts him.

But it's chilling nonetheless. Green talks of tens of millions of 
people, filled with anger, with a credulity that cares nothing about 
being rational; he see them as a force being used to drag the US back 
into the 17th century. I don't think he's exaggerating much.

I don't think very many Americans are aware of how the rest of the 
world gets the horrors when the US does this kind of stuff. :-(

>i think the
>only way the fascist dynamic in this country will switch from the
>crypto to the full

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Chris Burck]

not to be too glib, but. . .while i commend sarah for finally waking
up, she should have stopped hitting the snooze button 8 or 10 (or 15
or 20) years ago at least.  some of these signposts she's talking
about have been in evidence for at least that long.  "now the guessing
game is over"?  gimme a break.  we're long past that point.  there are
problems with paxton as well, which is inevitable when you try to
frame a discussion of this topic within the sanitized limits of
puritanical, post-depression/-WWII/-mccarthy american political
language.  but also, i think he under-appreciates crypto-fascism,
which is plenty effective enough and meanwhile the majority of the
people are none the wiser.  which means it can go on virtually forever
without that pesky fourth and fifth stage disruption.  i think the
only way the fascist dynamic in this country will switch from the
crypto to the full-on, jack-booted mass rallies variety, is either in
response to a major existential crisis such as a major, truly lethal
pandemic, or if they (the powers that be) decide that war with china
is simply unavoidable.

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Hi Kirk

>Didnt Mussolini say Fascism is corporatism?

It seems he didn't:

>  > This is the famous Mussolini quote: "Fascism should more properly be
>>  called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate
>>  power." -- Benito Mussolini
>>
>>  But Public Eye reckons he never said it. See:
>  > http://www.publiceye.org/fascist/corporatism.html
>>  Mussolini on the Corporate State
>>
>>  Play it again Benito. :-)
>
>Such was my understanding. Benito, from what I've read, was basically
>a strong man thug type. Government philosophy wasn't one of
>his strong points.

- Re: [Biofuel] Fascists at it again
Chip Mefford
Wed, 07 May 2008
<http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg72589.html>

>I think their definition of truth is whatever they can get us to believe.

Indeed, pliable stuff, truth, it turns out, especially after the last 
30 years of spin-on-steroids (it costs a trillion bucks a year), and 
especially in the US. It's not that the US is more gullible, just 
that it's the prize catch. Check out all the different brands of 
implanted whackoisms you get these days and you have to ask, What 
_can't_ they get you to believe?

>Why else did they dumb our society down?

The better to sell you stuff you don't need that isn't good for you?

Well, hyperconsumerism is nice, but just as long as you're pliant, 
and compliant. Whatever, it's the same process as getting you to 
believe stuff that isn't good for you. You buy stuff, and you buy 
into stuff, and then you just keep on paying.

Robert Paxton's piece is a good read, it sheds much clarity on what 
we were discussing in that thread about fascism, IMHO.

Just a reminder - in the archives the whole thread is linked at the 
bottom of the page, but with longer discussions that branch a lot it 
comes in segments. Here's the link again: 
<http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg72589.html>. 
Go to the end of the page. The message links are indented so you can 
see what's happening, and colour-coded so you know where you are, 
where you've been, and where you haven't been yet. You'll notice that 
the original message isn't there, they're all Re's. Click on the 
first one: 
<http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg72564.html>, 
go to the end of the page, and there it is, the original message, 
"[Biofuel] Fascists at it again" - posted by Kirk McLoren. :-) If 
you'd clicked the last message instead of the first one you'd have 
found different links again. Nice to browse, full of nuggets.

>Kirk
>
>Just in: Energizer Bunny arrested, charged with battery

:-) Now I get it, but I didn't know what Energizer Bunny is, I had to 
look it up. "The Energizer Bunny is the marketing icon and mascot of 
Energizer batteries in North America." Oh I see. "In North America, 
the term 'Energizer Bunny' has entered the vernacular as a term for 
anything that continues indefatigably." Success! Ha - doesn't work on 
me, I'm immune to pink unless nature does it. That's an improvement, 
by the way, at least I don't want to eradicate pink stuff these days. 
(There are reasons for all this...) It might be a fascist thing to 
do, but I wouldn't mind much if they made it a federal offence to 
make anything pink. At least you wouldn't be taken over by jackbooted 
gangs of thuggish pinkshirts. And you could have the Energizer Bunny 
arrested on charges of being pink while making people believe stuff 
that isn't good for them.

Another definition of truth - what the competition can't sue you for. 
Not truth: "The original slogan boasted that '...[n]othing outlasts 
the Energizer...', but it was eventually changed after a lawsuit 
filed by Duracell disputing Energizer's claim." Truth: instead 
"Energizer ran a series of commercials featuring a fake rival 
battery, Supervolt (including a Supervolt weasel mascot), that was an 
obvious look alike of Duracell." 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energizer_Bunny> Energizer Bunny speak 
with forked tongue.

Best

Keith



>--- On Tue, 8/11/09, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...
>To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org
>Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 10:38 AM
>
>Fascist America: Are We There Yet?
>by Sara Robinson
>Published on Sunday, August 9, 2009 by OurFuture.org
><http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/09-5>
>
>The Five Stages of Fascism
>Robert O. Paxton
>The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 70, No. 1. (Mar., 1998), pp. 1-23.
><http://www.salemstate.edu/~cmauriello/pdfEuropean/Paxto

Re: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Kirk McLoren]

Didnt Mussolini say Fascism is corporatism? I think their definition of truth 
is whatever they can get us to believe. Why else did they dumb our society down?

Kirk

Just in: Energizer Bunny arrested, charged with battery
 

--- On Tue, 8/11/09, Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Biofuel] Chilling stuff...
To: biofuel@sustainablelists.org
Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 10:38 AM

Fascist America: Are We There Yet?
by Sara Robinson
Published on Sunday, August 9, 2009 by OurFuture.org
<http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/09-5>

The Five Stages of Fascism
Robert O. Paxton
The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 70, No. 1. (Mar., 1998), pp. 1-23.
<http://www.salemstate.edu/~cmauriello/pdfEuropean/Paxton_Five%20Stages%20of%20Fascism.pdf>

Inside Story on Town Hall Riots: Right-Wing Shock Troops Do Corporate 
America's Dirty Work
By Adele M. Stan, AlterNet
Posted on August 10, 2009
<http://www.alternet.org/story/141860/>



___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20090811/2d261417/attachment.html 
___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

[Biofuel] Chilling stuff...

[Keith Addison]

Fascist America: Are We There Yet?
by Sara Robinson
Published on Sunday, August 9, 2009 by OurFuture.org


The Five Stages of Fascism
Robert O. Paxton
The Journal of Modern History, Vol. 70, No. 1. (Mar., 1998), pp. 1-23.


Inside Story on Town Hall Riots: Right-Wing Shock Troops Do Corporate 
America's Dirty Work
By Adele M. Stan, AlterNet
Posted on August 10, 2009




___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/