There are states of mind we will not win over anytime soon. I’ve been in one of those states for a month and have a story to tell. I’ve lived for a long time (30 years) in other red states, Virginia and Colorado. I now live in Maine (my home state) for the past two years. (PS.I haven’t been able to blog in a while and may not be able to respond promptly.)
We arrived in Mississippi a week after Katrina to do post Katrina construction relief work. Get people back into their houses, roof over their head and so forth. We started in Laurel, MS, a town of some 30,000 90 miles from the coast. Every fourth house had a tarp on it, trees into houses, across driveways, debris in the roads, well, it looked like a week after a mighty big storm. Now, before anyone gets started, there are great people in MS, there are great people everywhere (regardless of political affiliation), and there is always the possibility of changing peoples minds. I’m sure Kerry got over 30% of the vote in MS, I even saw a Southerners for Kerry sticker. I got help and advice from Dems and progressives in MS. I live in a rural state, I lived in rural Colorado but I am here to say, there is a different world down here.
First, it’s physically different. Young (white) men’s haircuts are pretty much a variation of the old Ringo Starr look, long bangs hanging over the eyes, a throw back to the `rebel’ days of American Graffiti. Andy and Opie, sex, football, and Jesus (although Jesus is another code name for white and pure). Blacks know they are not equal, but most are also a throw back to the `50’s.Just give me my crappy job, leave me alone and come on Friday night is at least one motto. The invisible lines are everywhere. Go into a small convenience store and the sign says 79 cents, get to the register and if you’re white you pay 59 cents. It’s called double pricing and it exists. I’m sure I haven’t even picked up on half of it.
A few select scenes: I’m on the phone with a property manager who tells me he has some good places to rent and some worker homes but he can tell from talking to me that I would not want a worker home because, “those are for blacks, mexicans and guatamalans, they’re used to living on dirt floors.” Casually, normal conversation, no change of voice, he says this. I had to meet him. His office is replete with several copies of the Bible and from the news clippings I can see he is a minister who likes to bowl. He shows me a couple of places and along the way assures me there is no racism in MS today.
I’m standing outside a print shop in downtown Laurel. The owner brought me outside to show me downtown Laurel. Like many downtowns of mid size towns, it has been relatively deserted for the malls so there are few stores, not much to recommend it but he says, “Did you expect to see this in MS? In Laurel, it’s still 1978, and let me tell you, there is no color in MS, contrary to popular opinion.” Allow me to explain that statement. Since I’ve been in MS, I have been reassured many, many times there is no racism in MS today. I’m sure I’ve been told this since anyone can tell I’m not `from here’ in less than two seconds. I don’t even need to open my mouth. But they want me to know there is no racism in MS. Then they often proceed to tell me something racist. I quickly learned racists introduce themselves by saying, `there is no racism in MS today.’
I’m on the roof of a rental home (next door to the owner, there are a lot of landlords) with the owner who just had a huge tree (huge) removed from his own living room. He seems to be a nice person, quiet, a gentleman, and we’ve had a couple of conversations before. I mention to him he is lucky not to be in New Orleans or the coast where people lost everything. He said, “God was sending a message to New Orleans. They have evil ways and he has sent a message.” The man had a tree in his living room, and yet he said that.
Starting to get the idea? There’s more. The word conservative doesn’t even begin to describe it. This is beyond that. They have been drinking the Kool Aid so long, they don’t even know it’s Kool Aid. It’s like water, it is in the water, maybe even the genes. It’s deep. It’s everywhere. George Bush is a good man. Remember how blacks in the South used to have pictures of MLK and Kennedy around. Well, George is on the refrigerator and W stickers are on the cars.
Except one car. I’m on another roof and I see the owner’s car in the driveway. In large letters it reads, `Vote Republican’. I drive a blue Prius with blue bumper stickers (just 3) and a license plate that reads DEAN4US. I’m careful to park it where only my Red Cross donor magnet faces the house and I wear neutral t-shirts. Two of my sons are on this expedition and they call it the Deanmobile. So, I climb down the roof and then see what is under the Vote Republican. In smaller letters it says, `It’s easier than thinking’. That’s it, MS in a nutshell. I crack up. I ask the owner if I can show her something and take her halfway down the block to my car. She cracks up. She tells me about MS, double pricing and more.
It’s just a taste of the everyday world. We’ve been here a month, and we left Laurel after a week. Even for my sons who tend to dismiss all politics (at least they vote and vote Dem) it was too much. It’s a feudal world in MS. The plantations are alive and well. We moved to the college town of Hattiesburg. It’s larger, there’s a college but the mentality is really just a little more veneered. There are little islands of stuff like coffee and CD houses but it sure seems like 90% of the people are let’s say mis-informed. Again, I’ve only been here a month, these are my observations and anyone who wants to defend their blue life in MS, no problem. I grew up in the country, I make fun of big city liberal tenderfoots all the time so corrections to my perceptions are fine.
It’s going to take more than a bunch of people sitting in blue states thinking we can win a red state like MS just by `working hard’. This is a different world. You can work as hard as you want, reality and facts are not even part of the framework. I have some ideas though. They probably don’t involve Bush tho. FEMA and the hurricane? Some guy who fooled George with a bad resume. President Bush was here like 5 times after the hurricane, he cares. These people (well not the rich) send their sons and daughters to die for him. Attacking the feudal system won’t work either I’m afraid. They just want to be rich. Consumerism is alive and well, be you black or white. For instance, Wal Mart so dominates it’s driven other chains away. K Mart is gone and I’ve heard there’s a Target but haven’t found it. On Sunday (after church) people go to the real church (Wal Mart) and it’s a daze of addicts spending what little they have. There’s a `gotta have stuff to justify existence’ thing going on. Walking across the parking lot, I saw a normal looking college aged person getting on a motorcycle. I can’t explain it, she just looked `normal’. I felt like going over to her and saying, `Excuse me, are they all crazy or is it just me.’
So, what do we do? The word that might work here is Fair. This word might resonate. Is it fair that some people get health insurance but the rest of us don’t? Is it fair that college is priced out of sight? Is it fair that military service is about the only option for many? Is it fair? What happened to truth, justice and the American way? I’ll close on a note of hope. In the aftermath of Katrina, a reporter was interviewing a young, white redneck standing in the midst of what used to be his home. The reporter said, “What are your thoughts on the situation.” The young man shook his head slowly and said, “I don’t think Bush should be President no more.”
Phil, thanks for your good work and thanks for bringing this bit of truth to the table here at Booman. The situation in Mississippi is everything that you say it is. However, I do have to say that Dems are only a few percentage points behind on the state-wide level. This is why conservative and moderate Dems have a chance to be elected to state-wide offices.
There are some among us who want to throw the option for moderate and conservative Dems out the window in order to move the party to the left. However, as a realist, I understand my state too well and know that we will not be electing any radical left-wing Dems or Green Party members anytime soon.
I am as progressive as almost anyone here on BT, but I feel that the blue red-staters are in a unique position to understand our local fights. I see way too many on this board who have no understanding of the real red-state world, and I hope your diary will be a wake-up call to them.
I am unapologetically voting for conservative and moderate Dems on a regular basis in order to get the Rethuglicans OUT. I continue to believe that even moderate or conservative Dems would not have started the Iraq War, would not have brought the bankruptcy bill to the floor of the Senate or the House, would not have opted out of the ICC, would not condone torture, and would be much better for America than the Rethuglicans have been.
For years now I have been hearing R’s who are pro-choice say that they vote R because they know that abortion will never be criminalized anyway, and that the Religious right will never be able to force their reliigon on us, so they will vote for the Republicans anyway, even though they don’t believe everything that their party stands for. But many on our side do not understand that you can vote for someone who doesn’t espouse the most left-wing policies in order to get to the majority that will protect our rights and promote our views MUCH better than the R’s have.
The national Dems have been a poor opposition party, for sure, but they were doing a much better job than the R’s as the ruling party.
Thanks again, Phil. You have my heartfelt appreciation and support.
Thank you.
And thank you, too for this diary, Phil.
(Why I will NEVER mofoing live in the South again in my natural life.)
blksista, Thank you so much for everything you do for this site. I always read your posts with great interest.
I understand your comment about never living down here ever again, I don’t blame you one single bit. I often find myself on the brink of disappearing from this state forever, myself, even though I am a white male. The atmosphere of racism and cronyism is stifling.
The atmosphere of racism and cronyism is stifling.
As it is in Hawaii, the Dakotas, Texas, most of the Midwest, the North and Far West (California). Better in some, worse in others, that combination is in play just about everywhere. But the underlying reality is class separation.
That won’t change until the “floor” ceases to be a “ceiling”.
Yes, class discrimination is a big problem. Until Americans of the vanishing middle class realize that this country was founded with the break up of aristocracy and great wealth in mind and that there is no right in the Constitution for the richest to pass down their wealth untaxed, we will not make much progress. Primogeniture as the default inheritance procedure was outlawed in America in order to break up large tracts of land and vast sums of money between all the children, not just the eldest son. In this way, the founders sought to redistribute the wealth as the generations passed, and the “landed aristocracy” of the day would not be enshrined as the ruling class of America forever.
In my vision of America everyone has an opportunity to acquire large amounts of wealth through hard work and some luck. Everyone has a right to a living wage for hard work. And no one has a right to INHERIT huge wealth. There should not be a ruling class created by the repeated and untaxed transfer of wealth from generation to generation.
The Right has declared class warfare and accused those who represent the poor of creating it. Cronyism perpetuates the class distinctions and substitutes for primogeniture in today’s America.
Blueneck, I’m one of the folks who complains about the crap the Dems are pulling here in PA with the anti-choice Casey for senate, but I have to say that every time I read your posts in support of changing things from the inside, I find myself agreeing. Maybe I’m crazy, but I think I’m probably somewhat going down the middle between supporting some Dems and pushing for new ones where we can (I’m probably not going to be able to hold my nose and vote for Casey though).
Someone older and smarter than me once told me that you have to work inside the system at the same time you’re working outside the system, so you have more chances at success, and I’m thinking it applies to a lot of the discussions we’ve been having around here lately.
Both tactics are valid, and need to be done simultaneously, which is why all this infighting here lately is so fucking stupid.
I have said it before and will say it again ’til I’m bluer in the face that if I lived in a place that could elect a left of moderate Dem candidate and the national party supported a conservative Dem I’d be spittin’ mad, like some here are. But to throw out the entire concept of electing moderate or even conservative Dems where they are our best hope for regaining the majority is just plain ignorant, imo.
Did I mention that I’ve waited for days to say what I just said…
I am unapologetically voting for conservative and moderate Dems on a regular basis in order to get the Rethuglicans OUT.
What good is this…if they hold the same views as the “Rethuglicans”?
The only thing this does is “lock out” progressivism from the political debate…
This is the basis of “What’s the matter with Kansas” voting for Rethuglicans Dems only helps the GOP advance their bigoted and backwards issues.
I disagree that it locks out progressivism.
Phil, thanks for sharing what life is really like down south with people like me, who have a decidedly northeastern view of the world. It sounds surreal.
BTW, I was wondering yesterday if you had returned from your trip down there yet-glad to see you’re back.
Still in MS for 2-3 more weeks…thaqnks for all the comments and certainly, if I lived here i would support mod Dems over knee jerk Lotts and Barbours..one step at a time blueman made some thoughtful comments
Fair. To me that defines what people want everywhere in the country, to believe that if you work hard, study hard, you’ll have a chance to make things better for your kids.
I happen to believe that all work is honorable. I also believe that “working” and “poor” don’t belong together in the same sentence. If two people with kids go out that door every morning to work, they have a right to expect a wage that pays for their food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare. What’s the label for that one?
That’s not a real long agenda, nor a complicated one. And truth be told, I don’t think anyone would argue with the need. Even if they lived in Mississippi.
It is not pragmatic. It is not pragmatic because it is not business friendly.
Both Democrats and Republicans must continue to pray each night that the underclass remains perpetually humble, kneeling in gratitude for being allowed a tarp over their dirt floors.
Historically, it has not been a successful prayer, US politics, the US itself, is not a long range game.
pray each night that the underclass remains perpetually humble
This time their prayers will go unanswered.
The 50-state strategy is not DOA; it’s not even moribund. Working hard might not win in Mississippi, but it is worth a try and definitely worth having candidates running. No one says that you have to win every single district; there are, after all there are two Democratic House Members of the four from Mississippi. A 50-state strategy is the political equivalent of a full-court press in basketball. It draws resources and attention away from other areas, and it makes a Republican misstep in a traditionally majority state more likely. That state might even be Mississippi. However, you don’t win in Mississippi by bringing in New Yorkers and Pennsylvanians to register voters; that is, unless you are serious enough to want a repeat of 1965.
Of the 2,081,000 population, only 965,000 whites are registered and 958,000 blacks. In 2004, it is estimated that 795,000 whites and 466,000 blacks voted. Kerry got around 458,000 votes. For Mississippi, Kerry is a worst case candidate for Democrats. In addition, the state Democratic Party was recovering from major problems; hopefully, those problems will be fixed before 2006. Nonetheless, the figures mean that at least 8000 blacks (and probably more since there are still white Democrats in Mississippi) voted for Bush. That is either the result of vote padding in heavily Bush counties, voter suppression, the influence of a few black ministers and black Republicans, or the mixture of all of these. What is striking is the fact that 492,000 black registered voters did not vote. Too many people died for the vote in Mississippi, white people too, for this amount of apathy to continue to exist.
Already there are seven Democrats, including Mike Espy, declared to take on Trent Lott. Democratic Member of Congress Bennie Thompson is opposed by one Democrat and two Republicans. Democrat Gene Taylor is unopposed at the point, as are the two Republican Members of Congress. The filing deadline is January 2006. Hopefully, there will be Democrats who will step forward to oppose Roger Wicker and Chip Pickering (who is the Republican seeking Lott’s seat). The good news. Both the Attorney General and the Secretary of State are Democrats.
“For Mississippi, Kerry is a worst case candidate for Democrats.”
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you have said. Kerry was indeed a worst case candidate for Mississippi. Why? Because he was perceived as too far to the left for most white Democrats and independents here to vote for him.
would be able to appeal to both affluent “liberal” Democrats while reassuring white Mississippi that their customs would not be jeopardized?
I think we can agree that it would not be pragmatic for any candidate of any party to go down there promising a living wage and equal pricing for cigarettes regardless of race.
First of all, the reassuring of white Mississipians that their “customs” would not be jeopardized has been the exclusive province of Rethuglicans here for quite some time (at least since Reagan made his famous “states rights” speech at the Neshoba County Fair to kick off his first winning campaign), and that is not a necessary element for a Democratic candidate to succeed here. In fact, just the opposite is true.
Otherwise your question is valid. I believe that a candidate that is pro-public education, pro-public healthcare, and pro-raising the minimum wage could do just fine. What doesn’t work here is pro-gay marriage and pro-third trimester abortion. Moreover, there is still a very provincial element that doesn’t want to elect anyone from a New England state. A moderate mid-westerner or southerner could do well enough to capture the majority here if they have some charisma. Pushing Phil’s idea would be good: fairness.
As for your comment after the question, I don’t agree, so don’t attempt to manufacture my agreement by presupposing it, please.
would cause white rural Mississippians to embrace racial diversity at the same time that more affluent Democrats support a candidate who advocates such an anti-business proposal as a living wage?
Either of these phenomena would be remarkable, to say the least, but to think of them both occurring simultaneously boggles the mind.
Your question concerning racial diversity is really asking me “How would you get Die-hard Republicans to vote for a Democratic party candidate”. The answer is: Nothing. That is not a requirement for a Democratic candidate to be successful here.
Furthermore, your supposition that a living-wage proposal is by definition anti-business is just not the case. In this regard, your question pre-supposes the Right wing talking points. Many people, including myself, believe that trickle-down economics simply doesn’t work. Therefore, the answer is to get more money into the hands of the working class who will then spend it on necessities. Grocery stores might have to pay more for labor, but more people will have money to buy steaks and beer instead of oatmeal.
I think Henry Ford is the success story here that everyone understands. He paid his workers well enough to be able to buy the product they were manufacturing. His worker’s wages were higher than his competition’s worker’s wages, but the Ford company rose to great heights and Ford himself became a multi-millionaire as a result. In this way, a living wage is pro-business. This is the position of most Democrats that I know, regardless of their personal wealth. It is decidely pro-business and pro-worker at the same time.
Wal-Mart doesn’t seem to understand it.
I haven’t heard a lot of Democratic politicians expressing understanding of it.
In fact, the only one who even suggested such a thing in the last “election campaign” was roundly ridiculed as a wacko and declared unelectable from the get go, depsite the fact that he held fast to the popular Democratic war position that the wetwork should be outsourced.
Even the notion of raising the minimum wage a token amount, for progressive public relations purposes, a measure that would have absolutely no effect in a society where housing alone costs almost 4 times the minimum wage, is considered anti-business.
Corporations are in business to make more profit, not less, and it is hardly pragmatic to suggest that the politicans that serve them turn insurgent.
Oops, sorry for the all-inclusive statement. I usually catch those before I let them get out, and you are correct to call me out on that. However, I do believe that most people will understand the “Henry Ford argument” if you present it to them. I have had a good deal of success in talking to wingnuts directly about Ford’s success. They usually end up being very quiet or changing the topic just enough so that they don’t have to respond to the argument against trickle-down theory.
If you didn’t hear any Democrats calling for increasing the minimum wage last election cycle, you are suffering from selective hearing. If you prefer that Rethuglicans freeze the minimum wage, as they have, instead of a Democratic majority that would at least keep the minimum wage indexed to inflation, that’s your prerogative. I don’t agree with you, though.
You seem to want all or nothing for every one of your positions. In one sense, this is admirable, because we do need people arguing for a real living wage that is higher than the minimum wage has ever been. On the other hand, I can’t agree that it has to be all or nothing, all at once. Many times, improvement comes in incremental fashion. Large societies don’t usually change quickly.
I will first argue for the return of minimum wage to previous standards, then argue that it is still too low. I will argue it in that order, because I personally believe that way has more of a chance for us to reach the ultimate goal of a living wage for everyone.
on rent day.
What I am doing is making a distinction between gestures and rousing speeches and eyewash and actual policy changes that will get that money into the hands of those working people so that they can afford to stay in housing.
They need that to happen today. And as long as it is all or nothing for the landlord, you might as well make it all or nothing for his tenants.
If that is not pragmatic, which I will be the first to agree it is not, then save yourself some disappointment and focus on goals that are pragmatic, like having massacres in Iraq named things that sound better than “Iron Fist.”
The folks who can’t pay the rent are more politically sophisticated than many realize, in fact they are more sophisticated than many are.
You won’t find a whole lot of folks who make minimum wage who cherish any notions that any politician, no matter how slick and shrewd he may be, or what pretty words he may use, is going to cause any major changes in their paycheck, unless he causes it to become no longer present.
The bad news for that politician, and his affluent devotees and corporate sponsors, has been written in history books, time and time again. And it is time that is very rapidly running out for US.
The good news is those folks can’t really do anything for him anyway. They don’t have any money for him, and they don’t have too much of a voice in which politicians their employers contribute to.
To imply that all pragmatism is equivalent to “having “massacres in Iraq named things that sound better than ‘Iron Fist.'”, is simply ridiculous. And just because I think that change usually comes in increments doesn’t mean that I like it or am happy about it either. I agree that the needs are urgent. I see it more clearly than you give me credit for.
of the reality of what “incremental steps” is that I have seen in quite a while.
The US did, after all, outlaw slavery. Now that was an increment.
Then a century later US outlawed racial apartheid. Another increment.
As another poster pointed out, the laws are there, it is a question of enforcement.
The question is, can you count on the folks sleeping on that dirt floor to wait another century for that?
To wait another half century, another decade, another year, for the law to be enforced, to have that housing, that medical treatment, that living wage?
Are you willing to bet your own kids’ future on the premise that their pragmatism is the same as yours?
It is not pragmatic for them to suppose that their kids will have any more than they have, in fact, it’s likely they will have even less.
There are many pragmatic and likely scenarios for them, and their families, none of which involve the luxury of middle class pursuits like savings accounts or politics.
One thing that you and they do have in common, they are not happy about it either. But they will have to do what they have to do, as will you, albeit within different and independent orbits of pragmatism.
Just as the massacre victims, who may be even more disdainful and unappreciative as you, if aware at all, of improvements to appellations assigned to atrocities have their own orbit of pragmatism, independent also of US politics, and independent of the US underclass.
You sound like the fundamentalists who claim that the world is coming to an end tomorrow and if I don’t convert to your exact way of thinking today, I and all my children will be damned to hell.
It is not my way of thinking that you have to worry about, but the way of thinking of the people who need the housing, the way of thinking of the people whose children are shredded in the massacre.
It is they who will decide when the sky falls, not I.
(I’m not able to address your theological allusion.)
Since you’ve decided that your way of thinking and my way of thinking do not matter, what’s the point? Let’s all do nothing at all and just wait for the revolution and the anarchy that would follow it. We could go dig ourselves some bomb shelters and hide from the world for thirty years or so and hope that things would get better in the meantime.
Your fatalism is your only persuasive tool, as far as I can tell. You’ve raised fatalism to the status of personal ideology. I’m not a fatalist, so I think that what you think and do are important, as I also think that what I think and do are important.
I challenge you to come and live in Mississippi and run for public office as a far left candidate campaigning on a platform of immediate radical reform and see how many votes you can get. Or at least come here and campaign for a far left candidate. Put your money where your mouth is.
If you can’t come up with anything else to say other than continuing with your line of fatalistic pronouncements, I’m done with this thread. Perhaps we will engage one another again in the future.
btw, I dig your sig line. I recently used it at a meeting and got a loud and nervous laugh from the group I was with. It helped me make some headway in opening some minds to the big picture of what’s really going on in our country. Thanks.
and repeated back to me what I said to you, and paid me a very nice compliment all in one post. 🙂
I can’t top that, but what I can do is make a distinction between fatalism and reality contact.
If you have a sucking chest wound, fatalism is lying there and doing nothing.
Reality contact is keeping expectations of how effective a get well card will be on the chest wound itself, without dismissing its potential to make you feel better as you decide whether to call 911.
Once again, you try to manufacture agreement where there is none.
You say we have a sucking chest wound, but I don’t agree. Looks more like a gut shot to me – very serious but not automatic death. The patient needs a good doctor real fast. While you run around screaming “death” at the top of your lungs, I’m trying to get the patient to a good doctor and applying first aid where I can… Maybe I can’t get the patient to the doctor in time, but I’m not giving up. You have already given up.
hope.
It may seem more like a sucking chest wound, again, to the folks without housing.
I think that the agreement between us is that it is unlikely that rural white people in Mississippi would be enthusiastic about any candidate, of any party, who promised to enforce civil rights laws and house the homeless.
In an earlier post, you mentioned education. Maybe the Democrats can engage those poor black people paying the extra twenty cents, enlist their help in educating all the new poor coming into the system about being patient and waiting for incremental change. Some of them might not know how important that is.
Another point of agreement we have is that no matter what you do, the homeless will not be housed, Iraqis will continue to be slaughtered, and increasing numbers of people will be unable to purchase medical treatment.
Where we disagree is how that affects you. And I cannot answer that, I don’t know how strong your portfolio is in defense and prison industry instruments.
I don’t know how hard it will be for you to pay for a security guard and your kids’ education, so I don’t know which side of the guns you will be on, whether you will be protected as you shop, or held off so that people who have more money can shop.
I do know that whatever the case may be, the Democrats will have a real challenge to come up with a candidate with enough charisma to go to the people on the dirt floors whose grandparents voted for the war on poverty and convince them that if they will support him, their grandchildren may be able to pay white folks prices for potato chips.
I agree that it would be difficult to get many rural AND urban whites in Mississippi to be enthusiastic about aggressive enforcement of civil rights, however I think you would be surprised about the attitudes of Mississippians concerning housing the homeless. In fact, as far as homelessness goes, MS probably ranks fairly well among the states.
This is due to the fact that even the conservatives will act to house the homeless, albeit through churches and NGO’s, not through the government. From what I have seen of other areas of the country, the homelessness problems are much worse elsewhere. Also, the citizens of this state are likely to have relatives close by who feel strongly enough about them to help them out. I did not say, however, that the housing situation for everyone here is good. In fact, there is probably more sub-standard housing here than in most states.
I also do not agree that no matter what I do that Iraqis will continue to be slaughtered forever or that medical treatment will be always be unavailable for the poor. I do think it could take more than a micro-second for the country to deal effectively with these issues. I know that you will now re-iterate how bad it is for the Iraqis who will die in the meantime, and for the poor who will suffer and die in the meantime from lack of adequate healthcare. I agree that more people than just you and I should be outraged by this, and if I could change it overnight, single-handedly, by waving a magic wand and saying some incantations, I would. But I can’t. And neither can you.
And I don’t believe that you are helping the situation by denigrating those that are working to make change happen as quickly as possible. Ridiculing people who think that sometimes change takes longer than a micro-second is utterly ridiculous. Comparing efforts to try to change the system within a few years (2006 and 2008) to the one hundred year gap between the end of slavery and the passage of civil rights legislation is also just ridiculous hyperbole.
Now, I certainly hope that indictments and impeachments bring the days closer to when real change can start on a large scale, but I’m not holding my breath.
As for how it all affects me, how can you possibly say that we disagree? By your own admission in the following sentence, you don’t know. I am fully aware of my own position, its frailties and strengths. You act as if you are the sole repository of knowledge as to how bad things can get if change is not implemented quickly enough, and that you are somehow blessing me with your wisdom in this regard. You are neither the sole repository of this information nor are you somehow blessing me with advanced knowledge on the topic.
You continue to read things into what I’ve said that are not there, and try to manufacture agreements and disagreements where there are none. And you continue to ignore the substance of my posts in favor of your doomsday harangues.
You may think that standing on the proverbial street-corner shouting about the end of the world will make things change, but I have always thought that real action and logical planning has more of a chance of preventing doomsday than standing around and shouting.
And I thank you for your effort.
I have no wisdom to impart, nor authorization regarding dispensation of blessings.
Friend, (I hope I’m not manufacturing that sentiment on your behalf, but from my side, know that the sentiment is there) I have seen your wisdom here: in the choices you have made about what to post as a diary and in many of your comments in other people’s diaries. The particulars of our own exchange have not diminished my esteem.
I am here because I sorely need a community of aware and like-minded thinkers to participate in. I believe that we here are together, before our disagreements separate us. The differences between us are small when stacked up against what we face together. If we test ourselves against one another, the strength we gain may be turned against the enemies of us all.
Peace.
Sorry to butt in, but this comment literally made me laugh out loud — this is how I feel about people telling me that if I don’t vote democrat, then I support the Bush regime and/or will be the cause of the complete downfall of the USofA and making my children and grandchildren’s lives a living hell!
(I am not saying that you said anything of the sort, blueneck, but just drawing a parallel)
and responsible for the downfall you will remain… democracy lover!!! 🙂
There damn many things that I do take responsibility for (and some of them are probably not even mine to claim) but the once and future fucked-up-ed-ness of the US of A ain’t one of ’em!
Not my mantle, thank you just the same!
😉
Hi Brinnainne!
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again ’til I’m bluer in the face, that I think it is good to try to fix this mess from inside the Dem party and outside the Dem party. I believe that it is also important to encourage my die-hard Republican friends to vote for moderate Republicans, not wing-nuts.
I bear no ill will towards those who choose a method of attack different from my own. If we all work to move the entire dialogue to the left, we are doing something good. I feel no overwhelming compunction to intimidate anyone who is not in agreement with my tactical assessment. I am no ideologue. Do what works for you, please.
So now do we have to call you blueneckandface?
And I strongly support your (and anyone else’s) thinking that is it is good and whatever you choose to do in that vein. I too, feel the need to encourage my right-leaning friends to consider their votes carefully (though most of them don’t vote)…so we all work where we feel we have the most effect, and that is all good.
oh, and, I am not easily intimidated, so no worries there!
😉
🙂
Glad you’re not intimidated either. And glad that we can choose our own paths without forcing conversion therapy on each other!
I am really curious. . .
Does anyone know when we will ever be able to undo this false perception of 3rd trimester abortion? You can’t get one anywhere now. . .unless it is to save the life of a mother, and then in most states it is almost impossible to get any type of abortion unless you are in a major city. . .NY, Chicago, LA, SF, Seattle, etc. (women in poor and rural areas are pretty much not able to travel the required distances or go through all the hoops they must now)
Just really asking, not wanting to disrupt the thread here or start any arguments. . .but I sure don’t know how we can stop this persistent and flat out lie about 3rd trimester abortions. They just do not exist unless the mother is in danger. Maybe some of you who are much smarter than I am have a suggestion.
If it is wished to outlaw anything in the 3rd trimester, then I guess the mother and the child will both just have to die.
Thanks.
Well, shirl, I’d love to help you out there. First of all, let me state for the record that I am unequivocally pro-privacy and for the woman’s right to choose, under any circumstance and at any time.
AND all I’m trying to say in the above remark is that there are some positions that would most likely cause a candidate to lose a state-wide election in Mississippi. Those positions are some of the positions I hold strongly, but giving speeches in support of any of those topics would not help a candidate attract the so-called moderates and independents in Mississippi, imho.
Now, to reply to the substance of your question: I don’t know.
The problem lies within a whole world-view that is prevalent here. The world-view that is born from ignorance. The only answer that I see for most of these people down here is better education and a new generation. The whole system of class and race warfare is solidly in place here in Mississippi. This includes inadequate funding of public education, inadequate funding of public healthcare, and anti-union agitation, as well as repression by churching.
On the positive side, though, the young liberals are coming. I have met quite a few of them in the past three or four years. Many of the 18-24 yr old crowd is aware of the game, and see the real problems in our state as I describe them. There is hope for the future here, I just wish it would hurry up and arrive. I do what I can, when I can, and I think I do some good from time to time.
Thanks for your response. It is good news about the young liberals. I hope someone or some group will come up with a way to educate all of our people in all of the states, regardless of how they wish to vote. Lack of knowledge is a pretty serious thing especially about the type of concerns we have for our country.
Thanks again
Shirl
First of all, not all “liberal” Democrats are affluent, even in Mississippi.
And I don’t think the issue is totally the jeopardizing of “customs”. The issue is enforcement of the law. It’s not new legislation, it’s the enforcement of existing legislation. And it must occur at the state level this time. More voter participation and election monitoring by blacks, especially Mississippi or Southern blacks would help. And that requires the determination that existed during the Civil Rights era from Southern blacks and white Southern progressives, like the Southern Poverty Law Center.
In the 1970s, there was growing political power and moderation in even hardcore racist counties–and then Ronald Reagan got elected.
I have hope that Mike Espy will make a run of it against Lott. After the corruption of Delay and company, accepting tickets from Tyson Foods to a ballgame does look quite as bad. And he did have white support when he was in Congress.
As for a living wage, I believe there might be some whites more interested in that now. White and blacks have a history of participation in the labor movement in the 1930s. Some folks’s grandparents might have been involved. And a living wage is a milder expression than collective bargaining.
Mississippi voting for a Democratic President? Unlikely in 2008. Hopefully in my lifetime.
Thanks for catching the “affluent” remark, I didn’t address it properly in my reply.
suit going on, I don’t even want to speculate on the hilarity that could ensue… 😉
…is not an option.
Your comments really hit home for me. This paragraph…
…took me back to high school, when I spent time visiting a friend who had moved to rural South Carolina (halfway between Charleston and Savannah) in 1977. Coming from Philadelphia, with its black power movement and interracial violence, the only word I could find for the black people I met was “docile.” I thought I was in “a whole ‘nother country,” as the travel ad used to say. Apartheid South Africa came to mind.
Like you said, it’s been going on so long it was invisible to most of the people there, like the air around them. God bless the few who could see otherwise!
Anyway, this had been a long submerged memory, and I thought “Surely things have changed in a generation.” Then I moved here; a job transfer to Oak Ridge. Like your college town, things are more subtle here (also a college town), plus in Knoxville there are few blacks anyway (under 10%) for historical reasons (can’t operate plantations in the mountains).
For New Years Eve 1999/2000, our neighbors invited us over to ring in the millenium. They had too much to drink, forgot there were Yankees in the house, and two of the couples started talking about their childhoods in LA (Lower Alabama). We were flabbergasted (especially my wife; at least I had the previous experience in SC to relate it to). They frankly described exactly what you did, and how they missed it (sigh); “those were the good old days.” Needless to say, since then we’ve had nothing to do with them, other than a wave while walking the dog (we do still have to live here, at least a little longer); them shunning us as much as us shunning them.
One more anecdote – After getting laid off two years ago, I started a small consulting business with a professional associate that happened to be a black woman. Most of the time we didn’t have problems meeting in public, but once we met for lunch at (what passes for) a fancy restaurant in Oak Ridge, and waited to be served lunch for well over an hour, while the tables around us came and left, because someone didn’t approve of what they thought was an interracial couple. And Oak Ridge is supposed to be sophisticated because of the National Lab there – a little secret: the folks working the service and cashier jobs come down from the surrounding small towns in the mountains.
I was ready to rip someone’s head off, but my partner was very cool and tactful in handling the situation. Leaving, she simply grinned and said to me “Welcome to the world of a black person.”
No real point to all of this I guess, except to let anyone that thinks you might be off base know that you’re spot-on, at least in my experience. The vast majority of Southerners are invariably polite, are generous and hospitable, but man, for that certain percentage, if race somehow comes into the discussion the shock will blow the boots off your feet like a lightning bolt, if it hits you unaware.
Damn, I believe it, but its worse than I want to believe.
Maybe this diary will help our friends in solid blue states like NY and CA understand why a uniform 50 state strategy won’t work.
That’s not to say there can’t be elements that are the same in all 50 states. Some wonderful examples have been given above of things that are universal in appeal.
Campaigns are like selling medication. Except we’re not required to list all of our potential negative side effects like bloating, diarrhea, distemper, rabies, hallucinations, or whatnot. The republicans know this. They vet their candidates on the controversial issues early, so in the general campaign they never have to bring it up, or the candidate can just give the code word to silence the questions. Demanding not only loyalty but PDIs (Public Displays of Ideology) can be counterproductive.
Presidential runs are tough. But as for Senate/House races, we can’t impose NY standards on MS candidates. We can’t even impose CA standards on SD, ND, MN candidates.
Just one example — immigration. What could help us in NY, CA, and FL could easily cost us the entire South and much of the midwest.
This doesn’t mean we have to settle for candidates who will undermine the entire party. But we should all remember its up to us to change social attitudes, to get our politicians elected, to enact our priorities.
We can find candidates who support our priorities, and maybe they can educate the electorate on an issue or two (universal healthcare — good for workers, good for businesses, helps us compete at home and abroad, etc) — but we can’t ask them to push the entire party platform on the campaign trail.
That doesn’t mean the only hope is red-state centrist. But it means that we want to pick presidential candidates who at least appeal to red staters.
After all, they’ve proven with Bush they’ll vote for a guy they don’t think too highly of. Plainspoken, direct, doesn’t make them feel stupid when talking to them (often mistaken for anti-intellectual, but really not the same thing). Doesn’t have to agree with their prejudices or biases, but doesn’t go out of their way to offend them just to score points in the bluer states. If philinmaine can get along down there, so can our candidates. You don’t have to please them, just don’t offend them, and heck, maybe you can even earn a little respect from them.
strategy is that we run a Democrat everywhere, every time.
Not a progressive Democrat necessarily, but a Democrat. Especially in those areas where we know we’re going to lose.
If we don’t do this, we continue to cede hundreds of State and county-level elected positions to the GOP. We further cement the idea in people’s minds that the Democratic Party doesn’t exist in their state. And we send a message to prospective candidates that they are on their own if they run.
I guess I disagree with the premise of the diarist and many comments here. The “50-State Strategy” as elucidated by Dean as a Presidential candidate, and again as DNC chair, says nothing about bringing California-style liberalism to Mississippi, or applying a universal template to all 50 states. It just says we don’t give up, anywhere.
This is my understanding of the 50-state strategy also. One feature of it – again, as I understand it – is that every state will have field workers from that state. The purpose of this part of the strategy is precisely to avoid clueless outsiders coming into an area from the DC consultant class, or anywhere else, and accomplishing nothing but alienating the locals.
I think of my work experience, where we get an new president every few years – always hired from somewhere far away. The worst of them have done incredible damage by immediately instituting some reorganization scheme and refusing to listen to anyone, even though those of us who have been here for many years could have told them, “We tried exactly that back in –, and it caused these unintended consequences – a), b), c) – and if you are going to do it again, how are you going to prevent the same from happening this time?” or, “That may have worked well where you came from, but this organization is different in these ways a), b), c) and it is not likely to work here because the outcomes will be different here.”
None of this is to say that local field organizers should see their jobs as pandering to local prejudices or abandoning core progressive principles for the sake of local “electability.” Quite the contrary. I think it means that someone with an understanding of local history and culture is much more likely to reach local voters in a way that is not insulting or ignorant – and is therefore more able to communicate core progressive principles in a way that will allow voters to explore those principles without simply rejecting them out-of-hand because they feel patronized and preached to. I firmly believe that there are many people currently disgusted with the political process who would return to participation in it – and who do in fact share most of our goals (see polls that show the majority of people agreeing with progressive ideas when they are presented neutrally).
Many people – especially in the South, will never, ever embrace our principles. However, consider this – I see too many political strategists spending untold energy debating whether we should try to convert southern white racists or fundies over to our side – by soft-pedaling or abandoning one core principle or another – or whether we should just “write off the South.” But I rarely see them debating how to involve more African-American Southerners in the political process.
I’ve met one of our Texas “50-state” field organizers whose salary is paid by the DNC.
He’s an African-American Texan.
Excellent start, imo.
Thanks for your comment, ubikkibu. I think you are right in your assessment of Dean’s fifty state strategy. I absolutely believe that we have to run Democrats everywhere, aggressively.
My understanding of Dean’s 50 state strategy is exactly as you said. I think that other places in the blogoshpere are more likely to push a one-size-fits-all strategy — which leads them pretty quickly into a “lowest common denominator” strategy nationwide.
That’s why I emphasized a uniform 50 state strategy would be a mistake. I think the Dean 50 state strategy is the only sane one. If we’re not willing to put out an effort in all 50 states for say the presidency, we’re basically admitting “Well, our guy will only be representing most of the US”. What a brilliant message to send to the south. Sheesh.
And we certainly don’t want that. Just because an idea (gay rights) doesn’t fly in MS doesn’t mean we shouldn’t push for it elsewhere — we must. Heck, the biggest problem with our candidates isn’t their position on the issues, its their timidity in taking a stand and advocating their positions.
Nah, there’s a fine distinction between ‘simple’ and ‘simpleminded’. ‘Supply side economics’ and ‘nationwide centrist values Democratic campaigns’ are simpleminded — competing on the entire field is just ‘simple’.
I’m the diarist and I agree with those like blueneck, etc saying Dean’s 50 state strategy is not uniform and not meant to achieve vistory overnight. I just wanted a catchy title to go with my perceptions of MS..and yes, the notion that winning even 20 states outright is not going to happen in an election. We have a long term battle, and yes, we need hard working volunteers everywhere.
if it’s about trying to win over or convert people from highly varied backgrounds. I think there is hope of succeeding, though, if campaign workers go into these communities and really listen to people, and the Democratic party shows that it is listening and responding. People of all walks of life have something in common, and it’s about to get way more obvious: neither party represents “we the people.” These parties love to label us and decide they can or can’t win our vote, but they demonstrate over and over that they do not listen. Dems need people on the ground, knocking on doors and going to meetings and asking people what they need to make them feel secure — not polls, not “message,” listening to people. Clinton’s campaign did some version of this and really worked. He expressed genuine concern, one on one, for the human beings along the campaign trail. But, the parties, don’t do it. They lecture. They tell us what we need, and they decide which of their labeled groups they can take for granted and which they can win over. That’s not representing.