Saturday, October 31, 2009
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Bush says he will lift sanctions against N. Korea
About George Bush
My my, hey hey, George W Bush has found his way. The Decider has decided that He is relevant. He himself has said it. Rage rage, Decider against the dying of the light. Do not go gently in to that post-POTUS good night.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
My my, hey hey, George W Bush has found his way. The Decider has decided that He is relevant. He himself has said it. Rage rage, Decider against the dying of the light. Do not go gently in to that post-POTUS good night.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
Sunday, June 15, 2008
A BIPARTISAN NEED FOR LIBERTY
The reaction was to be expected from those accustomed to the daily cat and mouse game called politics. The experts always know. That is why Representative Dennis Kucinich's articles of impeachment were ridiculed as worthless, "a waste of time" from a "annoying gnat". While the movers and shakers of his own political party have more important matters to attend to than defending the Constitution and the rule of law.
Something ironically similar was happening across the pond, in the United Kingdom. That is where Gordon Brown's Labour party government is trying to enact a law that enables the government to hold terror suspects, or as they say, persons of interest, for 42 days without any redress. Tory Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, resigned from the House of Commons in disgust.
"I had always viewed membership of this House as a noble endeavor," said David Davis. "Not least because we and our forebears defended the fundamental freedoms of our citizens. Or we did, up until yesterday."
"This Sunday is the anniversary of Magna Carta --the document that guarantees that most fundamental of British freedoms-- Habeus Corpus."
Here in the United States, I begin to wonder how many people still remember that the Magna Carta is the root document of the United States Constitution. It is where it was officially established that no one is to be above the law. As Winston Churchill said in 1956: "here is a law which is above the King and which even he must not break."
Evidently, this is not the case for President Bush, who attempts to shrug off the Supreme Court ruling on the rights of detainees, simply because it was a 5-4 decision. Senator Barack Obama said the Supreme Court ruling refutes "the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole in Guantanamo." But that legal black hole most certainly exists, simply by making the false claim that human legal standards do not apply to military tribunals. Yes, it is what it is: a breathtaking argument for legalized torture.
Meanwhile, over in England, David Davis has remarked that the British have "the most intrusive identity card system in the world. A CCTV camera for every 14 citizens, a DNA database bigger than any dictatorship has, with thousands of innocent children and a million innocent citizens on it... the creation of a database state opening our private lives to the prying eyes of official snoopers..."
It is wise to remember that these objections to the Orwellian order, come from a conservative Tory member. That is also why Dennis Kucinich said his articles of impeachment were not about politics, but the rule of Constitutional law. How strange that a few persons in high powerful positions think it is perfectly acceptable to ignore the law upon which all of western civilization is based: the liberty of its citizens. A state sponsored abolition of basic freedoms becomes a final victory for terror. To say you are defending freedom by destroying it, using the cafard of security, is to be sure, very strange indeed.
Something ironically similar was happening across the pond, in the United Kingdom. That is where Gordon Brown's Labour party government is trying to enact a law that enables the government to hold terror suspects, or as they say, persons of interest, for 42 days without any redress. Tory Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, resigned from the House of Commons in disgust.
"I had always viewed membership of this House as a noble endeavor," said David Davis. "Not least because we and our forebears defended the fundamental freedoms of our citizens. Or we did, up until yesterday."
"This Sunday is the anniversary of Magna Carta --the document that guarantees that most fundamental of British freedoms-- Habeus Corpus."
Here in the United States, I begin to wonder how many people still remember that the Magna Carta is the root document of the United States Constitution. It is where it was officially established that no one is to be above the law. As Winston Churchill said in 1956: "here is a law which is above the King and which even he must not break."
Evidently, this is not the case for President Bush, who attempts to shrug off the Supreme Court ruling on the rights of detainees, simply because it was a 5-4 decision. Senator Barack Obama said the Supreme Court ruling refutes "the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole in Guantanamo." But that legal black hole most certainly exists, simply by making the false claim that human legal standards do not apply to military tribunals. Yes, it is what it is: a breathtaking argument for legalized torture.
Meanwhile, over in England, David Davis has remarked that the British have "the most intrusive identity card system in the world. A CCTV camera for every 14 citizens, a DNA database bigger than any dictatorship has, with thousands of innocent children and a million innocent citizens on it... the creation of a database state opening our private lives to the prying eyes of official snoopers..."
It is wise to remember that these objections to the Orwellian order, come from a conservative Tory member. That is also why Dennis Kucinich said his articles of impeachment were not about politics, but the rule of Constitutional law. How strange that a few persons in high powerful positions think it is perfectly acceptable to ignore the law upon which all of western civilization is based: the liberty of its citizens. A state sponsored abolition of basic freedoms becomes a final victory for terror. To say you are defending freedom by destroying it, using the cafard of security, is to be sure, very strange indeed.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
FINDING A DIFFERENT WAY
Television misinforms everyday. It is part of the corporate mission to keep the customers (i.e. consumers) in a constant state of agitation. Agitation works. Being dissatisfied is a perfect state to foist upon you new products, or sometimes simply new concepts, that you did not know about until you found that you must have them, no matter what. Movies. I-Phones. Drugs for conditions that you were unaware existed. Restless Consumer Syndrome. Ask your doctor if RCS is right for you.
Sadly, the corporate huckster approach is applied to nearly everything. Politics, militarism, you name it, becomes a package that often has to be repackaged. Media consultants, bloggers, pundits, and celebrities become an essential part of the mix, creating illusions within delusions. Mission Accomplished. Doing a heck of a job. Victory with honor, dead or alive.
Unfortunately, reality has a way of exposing its fangs. There is an energy crisis. It is exacerbated by the Iraq occupation, along with the other missions, as they are called, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The agitated customers become even more restless when they discover it now costs real money to run their automobiles.
But the corporate state is not interested in any kind of national response. If there was such a thing, you would have the President of The United States declaring a national emergency. Saving and reducing fossil fuel use would be job 1. Natural gas would be nationalized. Extravagant indulgences such as stock car racing would be banned. Other recreational indulgences, such as all terrain vehicles and boats, would have to pay an extra tax for their waste. The automobile as consumer fetish would be seen for what it truly is: an unnecessary marketing gimmick. The use of lawnmowers would be reviewed.
Of course none of this is going to happen. Especially in the "you are going to feel some pressure" form I speak of here. American culture is simply too fond of corporate branding and the way of life it implies. The capitalist cornucopia promised, is what President Bush called "our way of life" that they (the evil ones) hate us for. The freedom to shop till you drop. But even that has become more difficult recently. The rising price of food is partially blowback for the increased use of Biofuels. As Geoffrey Lean of The Independent pointed out: "Just one fill-up of a 4x4's tank with ethanol uses enough grain to feed one person for a year."
The squeeze is on in one form or another, for everyone accept those of the ownership class. The political response to this situation, has so far, been incredibly lame. The so-called economic Darwinism that free marketeers wax poetic about, what the late Hunter Thompson called "the punishment ethic" embraced so readily by the Republican party, has become in fact, a security threat to the stability of this nation. How this country is more secure by a having a substantial segment of the citizenry squeezed to the point of monetary oblivion, is truly incomprehensible.
The same can be said for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If this was about oil, then the amount of money wasted on this war, could have purchased all the oil needed, without all the loss of life. But if that wasn't the point, then the neocon abstraction of "coercive democracy" as Scott McClellan put it, becomes the cruelest reason of all. Outrage at this stage, is a moot point.
If the United States, which spends more on weapons than nearly the rest of the world combined, would redirect all that energy to constructive purposes, the economic outlook would change, and certainly for the better. The need for infrastructural improvements is like a house literally screaming to be painted. The expansion of intelligent technologies brought about by the mass production of optical components and the improvements wrought from digital measurement... these areas of development are still in their infancy.
Strangely, despite all the information that is easily available, both current and historic, there is an astonishing number of people who are misinformed. Calculated misinformation has been perpetrated by those seeking to further their false agendas. As a result, we have people who believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the September 11 attacks, and that the Muslim faith is out to destroy America. The internet, and especially Google, is what you make use of it for. Obviously it can be a tool for education, probably the greatest in human history. Or, it can be used for games, social netweorking and of course, porn.
When it comes to open source applications for the internet, the majority of American desktop computer users are just not that interested. I once mentioned that most of the problems with electronic voting is caused by using proprietary software. The puzzled response to this was like I had arrived from another planet. Come to think of it, maybe I have.
If the goal is, not only for this country, but the entire planet, a prosperous survival, then finding a different way is not only necessary, it is vital. The old time dishonored responses of ideological violence have become as useless as they are dangerous. This is difficult for some to grasp how many easily accepted notions, were nothing more than unconscious myths. We are certainly in unfamiliar territory. The road maps of the twentieth century are obsolete.
Sadly, the corporate huckster approach is applied to nearly everything. Politics, militarism, you name it, becomes a package that often has to be repackaged. Media consultants, bloggers, pundits, and celebrities become an essential part of the mix, creating illusions within delusions. Mission Accomplished. Doing a heck of a job. Victory with honor, dead or alive.
Unfortunately, reality has a way of exposing its fangs. There is an energy crisis. It is exacerbated by the Iraq occupation, along with the other missions, as they are called, in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The agitated customers become even more restless when they discover it now costs real money to run their automobiles.
But the corporate state is not interested in any kind of national response. If there was such a thing, you would have the President of The United States declaring a national emergency. Saving and reducing fossil fuel use would be job 1. Natural gas would be nationalized. Extravagant indulgences such as stock car racing would be banned. Other recreational indulgences, such as all terrain vehicles and boats, would have to pay an extra tax for their waste. The automobile as consumer fetish would be seen for what it truly is: an unnecessary marketing gimmick. The use of lawnmowers would be reviewed.
Of course none of this is going to happen. Especially in the "you are going to feel some pressure" form I speak of here. American culture is simply too fond of corporate branding and the way of life it implies. The capitalist cornucopia promised, is what President Bush called "our way of life" that they (the evil ones) hate us for. The freedom to shop till you drop. But even that has become more difficult recently. The rising price of food is partially blowback for the increased use of Biofuels. As Geoffrey Lean of The Independent pointed out: "Just one fill-up of a 4x4's tank with ethanol uses enough grain to feed one person for a year."
The squeeze is on in one form or another, for everyone accept those of the ownership class. The political response to this situation, has so far, been incredibly lame. The so-called economic Darwinism that free marketeers wax poetic about, what the late Hunter Thompson called "the punishment ethic" embraced so readily by the Republican party, has become in fact, a security threat to the stability of this nation. How this country is more secure by a having a substantial segment of the citizenry squeezed to the point of monetary oblivion, is truly incomprehensible.
The same can be said for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If this was about oil, then the amount of money wasted on this war, could have purchased all the oil needed, without all the loss of life. But if that wasn't the point, then the neocon abstraction of "coercive democracy" as Scott McClellan put it, becomes the cruelest reason of all. Outrage at this stage, is a moot point.
If the United States, which spends more on weapons than nearly the rest of the world combined, would redirect all that energy to constructive purposes, the economic outlook would change, and certainly for the better. The need for infrastructural improvements is like a house literally screaming to be painted. The expansion of intelligent technologies brought about by the mass production of optical components and the improvements wrought from digital measurement... these areas of development are still in their infancy.
Strangely, despite all the information that is easily available, both current and historic, there is an astonishing number of people who are misinformed. Calculated misinformation has been perpetrated by those seeking to further their false agendas. As a result, we have people who believe that Saddam Hussein was behind the September 11 attacks, and that the Muslim faith is out to destroy America. The internet, and especially Google, is what you make use of it for. Obviously it can be a tool for education, probably the greatest in human history. Or, it can be used for games, social netweorking and of course, porn.
When it comes to open source applications for the internet, the majority of American desktop computer users are just not that interested. I once mentioned that most of the problems with electronic voting is caused by using proprietary software. The puzzled response to this was like I had arrived from another planet. Come to think of it, maybe I have.
If the goal is, not only for this country, but the entire planet, a prosperous survival, then finding a different way is not only necessary, it is vital. The old time dishonored responses of ideological violence have become as useless as they are dangerous. This is difficult for some to grasp how many easily accepted notions, were nothing more than unconscious myths. We are certainly in unfamiliar territory. The road maps of the twentieth century are obsolete.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
BANNED FROM THE HUFFINGTON POST
April 22, 2008 was a difficult day. The revelation that Senator Clinton would "obliterate" Iran if they attacked Israel only brought to light how inhuman a candidate can become in their zeal to secure their all important victory. How strange that the news media could continue to rehash the remarks of an angry black minister, as if the Reverend Wright was running for president. But very little was made about the "obliterate" remark. For myself, such a remark proves that Senator Clinton needs psychiatry, not the presidency. But I guess she really is ready from day one, to blow away some people to kingdom come. Was that why I have been banned from The Huffington Post?
I have been blogging comments on Huffington for the last five months. Although I do not use foul language, and have never attacked another blogger, for some strange reason I am now banned. Perhaps one of their moderators got tired of reading my criticisms of the candidates (I am after all, an advocate for peace and justice) and decided to rid their internet salon of my radical rantings. I say radical because the way the ball bounces in main stream media, if you so much as question our holy military policies, with attached armament industries, you must be a radical. The fact of being a peaceful person, who never advocates violence, does not make a bit of difference. To some in this society, thinking independently is considered a subversive act.
Perhaps the real reason I have been banned on The Huffington Post is because my last posting, I criticized the ownership class. Perhaps one of the Hufpo moderators read my remarks and thought: my God, that includes Ms. Stassinopoulos! Somebody better ban the bastard!
Part of what was written said: "The ownership class can play ideological games all they want. Those of us who do not own, have to live with the consequences. The indulgences of the privileged are always with us. This enables public money to be squandered on sports stadiums, bank bailouts, and of course the all time favorite: weapons!"
Is that why I was banned? Hard to believe that a person as insignificant as myself could warrant such a draconian option, but there it is.
I tried to contact Huffington Post to give me an explanation. Their response has been nothing. My comments before being banned can still be found on Google, at thebeerdoctor's huffington post profile. But there will be no more. Luckily, Newscloud, Truthdig and Streetalker.com, still welcome my writing. As one kind friend wrote: "that's their loss, not yours". Thank you.
I have been blogging comments on Huffington for the last five months. Although I do not use foul language, and have never attacked another blogger, for some strange reason I am now banned. Perhaps one of their moderators got tired of reading my criticisms of the candidates (I am after all, an advocate for peace and justice) and decided to rid their internet salon of my radical rantings. I say radical because the way the ball bounces in main stream media, if you so much as question our holy military policies, with attached armament industries, you must be a radical. The fact of being a peaceful person, who never advocates violence, does not make a bit of difference. To some in this society, thinking independently is considered a subversive act.
Perhaps the real reason I have been banned on The Huffington Post is because my last posting, I criticized the ownership class. Perhaps one of the Hufpo moderators read my remarks and thought: my God, that includes Ms. Stassinopoulos! Somebody better ban the bastard!
Part of what was written said: "The ownership class can play ideological games all they want. Those of us who do not own, have to live with the consequences. The indulgences of the privileged are always with us. This enables public money to be squandered on sports stadiums, bank bailouts, and of course the all time favorite: weapons!"
Is that why I was banned? Hard to believe that a person as insignificant as myself could warrant such a draconian option, but there it is.
I tried to contact Huffington Post to give me an explanation. Their response has been nothing. My comments before being banned can still be found on Google, at thebeerdoctor's huffington post profile. But there will be no more. Luckily, Newscloud, Truthdig and Streetalker.com, still welcome my writing. As one kind friend wrote: "that's their loss, not yours". Thank you.
Friday, April 4, 2008
ONLY WHEN IT IS DARK ENOUGH, CAN YOU SEE THE STARS
I was twelve years old when Martin Luther King Jr. was killed. A turbulent time to become a teen, made even tougher with the RFK shooting a couple of months later. It was a fiery time, with a certain kind of fire that no water could put out. I wrote this on the Huffington Post:
Whenever I think of Martin Luther King Jr., I also think of John Coltrane. Both men in the final phases of their lives chose to work with difficult, human spiritual matters. The marginalization of Dr. King's work against the Vietnam war and for economic justice, makes those who praise him as a noble symbol, rather than a living force for change, quite uncomfortable. The same can be said of John Coltrane, whose music was considered demanding and difficult, when he decided to literally "play his way over to the other side". Acknowledging the greatness of these endeavors would mean admitting that most of us suffer from a shallow perception of ultimate, metaphysical reality. Great souls help humankind to recognize that we indeed do have a soul. Truly, a remarkable accomplishment.
Which brings me back to April 2008. I received a campaign e-mail from Michelle Obama this morning, reminding me of the MLK legacy etc. Common wisdom has it that because her husband is the hot presidential candidate, who happens to be black, or fifty percent so, his candidacy represents the continuing legacy of Dr. King. Common wisdom has it that if Martin was around today, he would support Barack Obama. But would he? Putting aside the sanitized Martin Luther King; that version of history that embraces the I Have A Dream speech, but ignores his anti Vietnam war stance, which by today's cowardly media, would probably be called hate speech, you would have quite another take on current matters, including politics.
While doing research on Martin Luther King's last public address, the remarkable I See The Promised Land, a strange coincidence occurred when Barack Obama's 2007 AIPAC speech was found listed in Google, two entries down. Comparing the texts provided some insights.
"It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world, its nonviolence or nonexistence." It should always be remembered that this was spoken by a man who in less than twenty four hours was about to die a violent death. Compare that with this:
"We can refocus our efforts to critical, yet neglected priorities, such as combating international terrorism and winning the war in Afghanistan. And we can then, more effectively deal with one of the greatest threats to the United States, Israel and world peace: Iran. Iran's President Ahmadinejad's regime is a threat to all of us."
So said Senator Obama to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in 2007, sounding remarkably similar to Vice-President Dick Cheney. Was the Senator from Illinois, pandering to the Israeli lobby?
"a man can't ride your back unless it is bent." That is unadulterated MLK, like John Coltrane on the album AUM. Not for the timid, or those who accept compromise on matters that should never be compromised. As Jeanette Rankin said back in 1929, war "cannot be disciplined into decency or codified into common sense; for war is the slaughter of human beings, temporarily regarded as enemies, on as large a scale as possible." That was and is the vision of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Strangely I thought Barack Obama was a student of Martin Luther King's teachings. But that must be the Martin Luther King Lite I have heard about. I wonder if Senator Obama is a fan of John Coltrane's music. I can imagine him enjoying albums like Blue Train and maybe even A Love Supreme. But records such as Ascension or Live In Seattle? I can almost hear him saying: "you're wearing me out brother."
Whenever I think of Martin Luther King Jr., I also think of John Coltrane. Both men in the final phases of their lives chose to work with difficult, human spiritual matters. The marginalization of Dr. King's work against the Vietnam war and for economic justice, makes those who praise him as a noble symbol, rather than a living force for change, quite uncomfortable. The same can be said of John Coltrane, whose music was considered demanding and difficult, when he decided to literally "play his way over to the other side". Acknowledging the greatness of these endeavors would mean admitting that most of us suffer from a shallow perception of ultimate, metaphysical reality. Great souls help humankind to recognize that we indeed do have a soul. Truly, a remarkable accomplishment.
Which brings me back to April 2008. I received a campaign e-mail from Michelle Obama this morning, reminding me of the MLK legacy etc. Common wisdom has it that because her husband is the hot presidential candidate, who happens to be black, or fifty percent so, his candidacy represents the continuing legacy of Dr. King. Common wisdom has it that if Martin was around today, he would support Barack Obama. But would he? Putting aside the sanitized Martin Luther King; that version of history that embraces the I Have A Dream speech, but ignores his anti Vietnam war stance, which by today's cowardly media, would probably be called hate speech, you would have quite another take on current matters, including politics.
While doing research on Martin Luther King's last public address, the remarkable I See The Promised Land, a strange coincidence occurred when Barack Obama's 2007 AIPAC speech was found listed in Google, two entries down. Comparing the texts provided some insights.
"It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world, its nonviolence or nonexistence." It should always be remembered that this was spoken by a man who in less than twenty four hours was about to die a violent death. Compare that with this:
"We can refocus our efforts to critical, yet neglected priorities, such as combating international terrorism and winning the war in Afghanistan. And we can then, more effectively deal with one of the greatest threats to the United States, Israel and world peace: Iran. Iran's President Ahmadinejad's regime is a threat to all of us."
So said Senator Obama to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in 2007, sounding remarkably similar to Vice-President Dick Cheney. Was the Senator from Illinois, pandering to the Israeli lobby?
"a man can't ride your back unless it is bent." That is unadulterated MLK, like John Coltrane on the album AUM. Not for the timid, or those who accept compromise on matters that should never be compromised. As Jeanette Rankin said back in 1929, war "cannot be disciplined into decency or codified into common sense; for war is the slaughter of human beings, temporarily regarded as enemies, on as large a scale as possible." That was and is the vision of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Strangely I thought Barack Obama was a student of Martin Luther King's teachings. But that must be the Martin Luther King Lite I have heard about. I wonder if Senator Obama is a fan of John Coltrane's music. I can imagine him enjoying albums like Blue Train and maybe even A Love Supreme. But records such as Ascension or Live In Seattle? I can almost hear him saying: "you're wearing me out brother."
Sunday, February 24, 2008
DRAGGING THE SHIP OVER THE MOUNTAIN
Recent national political events have reminded me of something I have not considered for awhile. Watching Barack Obama going through the paces of his standard stump speech reminds me of the audacity of repetition. To find out you are genealogically related to someone, you hope that someone is cool. To be more seasoned means that all that hope is boiled out of you... I think you get the idea.
As a lifelong research student I am sometimes enthralled by the political process. A systems that enables avarice and naked ambition to be disguised as altruism and public service. This, it has been said, is par for the course. The political professionals, sometimes known as insiders, are hip to this gag. But what about the voters?
Maybe it is just blowback for being a political junkie, but I swear I recently thought I saw Barack Obama looking somewhat like Klaus Kinski. Klaus Kinski? Yes, the late actor who portrayed a vampire in Werner Herzog's remake of Nosferatu. But that is not the movie I am reminded of. Rather, it is the epic movie Fitzcarraldo.
Fitzcarraldo, if you have never seen it, is a movie about a man dragging a 200 ton steam ship over a mountain, as part of a commercial enterprise to build an opera house in a South American jungle town. Kinski's magnificent portrayal of Fitzcarraldo is that of a man with a dream obsession, and an indomitable will to make that vision a reality.
What is also quite remarkable about Fitzcarraldo is that the film itself is a record of visual truth. There are no special digital effects. Thus, the movie was indeed shot in the jungle, and that really is a full size ship being dragged over the mountain, and subsequently, bouncing down river rapids. There are no miniatures involved! Which strangely, reminds me of Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign. His vision obsession, with his background as a community organizer, is to change the discourse of American politics so that real problems can be addressed. But one of the biggest obstacles in realizing this vision is the Democratic party itself. That is the ship he is trying to drag over the mountain.
Consider this: look at the state of this country, as created by the politics-as-usual crowd. Hillary Clinton still boasts of the good times the country enjoyed when her husband was President, taking exaggerated credit for economic expansion (the dot com bubble) but not the retraction (when the dot com bubble burst) right after team Clinton left the White House. The same can be said about Bill Clinton's cheerleading and implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. A policy that enabled businesses to exploit labor south of the border (Yes you can in Yucatan!), eliminating thousands of living wage jobs in the United States, simultaneously, causing thousands of undocumented workers to risk life and limb to cross into the U.S., after multi-national agribusiness reaped havoc on local Mexican agriculture. Family farmers found themselves beneath the shadow of the Jolly Green Giant. This would be laughable if it was not so tragic.
Empty rhetoric or not, part of the appeal of Barack Obama's speech is that it invokes the idea of a more civilized world. Where free enterprise is not allowed to become the tyrant known as monopolized capitalism, and that human labor with dignity matters.
That may seem vague and unrealistic to some, but considering the delusional mind set in place now, this ship of state is about to head down the rapids, and could very easily smash up against the impending rocks.
The movie Fitzcarraldo has a bittersweet ending. Although his commercial enterprise fails, Fitzcarraldo sells his ship and uses the money to bring an opera company to the jungle. His dream was realized, just not the way he imagined.
As a lifelong research student I am sometimes enthralled by the political process. A systems that enables avarice and naked ambition to be disguised as altruism and public service. This, it has been said, is par for the course. The political professionals, sometimes known as insiders, are hip to this gag. But what about the voters?
Maybe it is just blowback for being a political junkie, but I swear I recently thought I saw Barack Obama looking somewhat like Klaus Kinski. Klaus Kinski? Yes, the late actor who portrayed a vampire in Werner Herzog's remake of Nosferatu. But that is not the movie I am reminded of. Rather, it is the epic movie Fitzcarraldo.
Fitzcarraldo, if you have never seen it, is a movie about a man dragging a 200 ton steam ship over a mountain, as part of a commercial enterprise to build an opera house in a South American jungle town. Kinski's magnificent portrayal of Fitzcarraldo is that of a man with a dream obsession, and an indomitable will to make that vision a reality.
What is also quite remarkable about Fitzcarraldo is that the film itself is a record of visual truth. There are no special digital effects. Thus, the movie was indeed shot in the jungle, and that really is a full size ship being dragged over the mountain, and subsequently, bouncing down river rapids. There are no miniatures involved! Which strangely, reminds me of Senator Barack Obama's presidential campaign. His vision obsession, with his background as a community organizer, is to change the discourse of American politics so that real problems can be addressed. But one of the biggest obstacles in realizing this vision is the Democratic party itself. That is the ship he is trying to drag over the mountain.
Consider this: look at the state of this country, as created by the politics-as-usual crowd. Hillary Clinton still boasts of the good times the country enjoyed when her husband was President, taking exaggerated credit for economic expansion (the dot com bubble) but not the retraction (when the dot com bubble burst) right after team Clinton left the White House. The same can be said about Bill Clinton's cheerleading and implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement. A policy that enabled businesses to exploit labor south of the border (Yes you can in Yucatan!), eliminating thousands of living wage jobs in the United States, simultaneously, causing thousands of undocumented workers to risk life and limb to cross into the U.S., after multi-national agribusiness reaped havoc on local Mexican agriculture. Family farmers found themselves beneath the shadow of the Jolly Green Giant. This would be laughable if it was not so tragic.
Empty rhetoric or not, part of the appeal of Barack Obama's speech is that it invokes the idea of a more civilized world. Where free enterprise is not allowed to become the tyrant known as monopolized capitalism, and that human labor with dignity matters.
That may seem vague and unrealistic to some, but considering the delusional mind set in place now, this ship of state is about to head down the rapids, and could very easily smash up against the impending rocks.
The movie Fitzcarraldo has a bittersweet ending. Although his commercial enterprise fails, Fitzcarraldo sells his ship and uses the money to bring an opera company to the jungle. His dream was realized, just not the way he imagined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
