a Far Right-Wing Supreme Court is a GOOD thing

[ProudDad]

I'm trying to make lemonade from lemons.

It's pretty inevitable that the SCOTUS will be moved further to the right. In fact, if Alberto Gonzales is considered the "liberal" alternative, we're in deep shit... He's a fascist at best.

The other possible nominees that * has available are further to the right than Rehnquist (some further than Thomas/Scalia with no paper trail). * will get his way -- the repukes won't block him and the Dem's are wimps.

So, given this set of circumstance, I have decided that this is a good thing.

For most of the last 75 years, beginning with the aberrant Warren Court, the oppressed, distressed, misused ones have sought help and support in the Federal Court System. There was a little movement toward Civil Rights for "minorities", there was a little movement toward a fairer more sustainable (albeit, still rapacious) economic system, some movement toward upholding environmental and (a very few) workplace fairness laws.

No more. The Federal Court System will revert back to the original purpose envisioned by the Founders, protecting the rich and powerful against the mob.

We, the mob, will definitely have to mobilize now. Now more than ever. We have the power if we do. Nothing is more feared by the rich and powerful as is the withdrawal of obedience and acquiescence by the masses.

For instance, even Taft-Hartley can't protect the rich and powerful against general strikes called by non-union workers banded together in community to fight the power. Neighborhoods of people can band together in community to fight takeover by rapacious developers and their lackeys in city governments who wish to grab property from the less affluent to benefit the rich. Who needs the courts to rule against police brutality if organized groups videotape all of their actions? Who needs the courts to fight polluters if we withhold our dollars from companies that pollute in favor of goods and services from companies that don't.

The economy WILL continue to go into the shitter. It's inevitable that the gap between rich and poor will continue to grow and the "middle class" (a fiction created to pit wage earners against one other) is shrinking and will continue to shrink. This gives us an opportunity to finally see that 98% of us are in this together being screwed by the 2%.

If there's no recourse in the Fed. Courts (a gravy train we were stupid to place all of our reliance on for that last 50 years) we will have to take to the streets.


TO THE BARRICADES!!!!

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[iconoclastic cat]

1. That's some damn bitter lemonade.

[ProudDad]

5. I agree

but a far-right court is what we're going to get.

The question now is what do we do about it?

[mmonk]

14. There's nothing we can do about it.

Anything that can be done about it must be done now, ahead of time or during the nomination process.

[ProudDad]

18. I'm not suggesting

that we decrease the pressure on the Dems. Someday, they may grow a spine.

However, the reality is that most of them are members of the ruling class too and won't do anything against their own interest. And their insterest, especially their economic interests, are NOT our interests as working people.

[iconoclastic cat]

15. I don't think that a "the worse, the better" strategy will do much good.

Mass protests and general strikes, however, might.

[ProudDad]

19. I am suggesting mass protests and strikes

as a tactic to wrest power away from these bastards.

This time though we have to develop non-hierarchal methods of self-governance or we'll face this kind of situation again and again.

[PretzelWarrior]

2. and if they get a 75 to 25 majority in senate

and 325 to 110 majority in House we'll REALLY show them. I like your attitude. thinking outside the box. if they win then they'll lose! BRILLIANT!

[ProudDad]

6. Where did I say that?

I would suggest that the first strategy to take back power would be to organize around the principle of fair, public financed elections and mobilizing the electorate so the forces for the people can finally be represented in the Senate and House.

[PretzelWarrior]

10. show us the way. the people who would make such changes

are on the take. main reason no one in house of rep. is pushing for new charges of ethics violations for Republican skalawags is they have dirt on so many Dems who would be brought into the spotlight of inquiry.

So....the truly evil and moneyed are able to continue representing interests OTHER than we the people.

[ProudDad]

20. We make the changes

We are ALL the leaders.

We don't need them...

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProudDad]

4. Ad-hominum attacks

don't constitute a discussion.

The final triumph of humanity will be when human beings finally realize that their "rulers" and the "owners" are bullshit and unnecessary.

My point is that a far-right supreme court is INEVITABLE and we should plan for organizing an alternative -- for thinking creatively and "outside of the box". We WILL be returning to the court of Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson and Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad.

My point is that the power of the 98% is much greater than the power of the 2% if we just realized it.

History has shown that humans don't seem to rise up against their oppressors until the heat is turned up so high they see no other alternative. The new far-right supreme court will be another log on that fire.

Since it's inevitable, why not plan for it?

[WinkyDink]

8. Oppressors....

have bigger weapons these days, and more "security" troops to use them.
Weren't past revolutions populated mostly by people with nothing left to lose? Try getting the Residents of McMansionville to march on D.C.

[ProudDad]

9. Gandhi

had only non-violent civil disobedience but with the help of a mobilized critical mass of the oppressed in India forced the (bankrupt) British Empire out of the country.

It can be done. It has to be done. It IS being done.

[AmandaRuth]

7. In a way I agree with you - America

apparently has to hit rock bottom before people wake up and see what is really happening -

[CANDO]

39. I agree 100% on the "rock bottom" theory.

Until the corporate whore party of Republicrats have things so screwed up that people finally start thinking critically, we will go nowhere but down the tubes. People will finally realize all the bullshit they've swallowed and that the trickle down theory really doesn't work. It's not stopping me from fighting the good fight, but people are going to have to get it on their own.

[Tux]

11. Really scare rich folks

Go to BuyBlue.org and try to purchase stuff from blue stores. If your bank is red, switch to a blue one. If you have stock in a red company, sell it and buy stock in a blue company. Try to decrease fuel use if possible. Reduce spending and put it in the bank (we all may need to do that just to pay for basic healthcare like blood pressure tests). The more we use our money to help blue companies, red companies will lose money and thus can't support neocons as much assuming enough people do that. The rich should fear us since they depend on us for money in many ways.

[ProudDad]

16. Right on!

This is definitely the kind of thing I'm suggesting as a start.

[navvet]

12. Just to make it really scary

Ruth Bader Ginsberg decides in a couple weeks that her health will not allow her to outlast srub and packs it in.

John Paul Stevens also retires due to health problems.

Net result 4 court vacancies and complete conservative dominance.

The Democrats filibuster and get nuked and then lose the PR war for tying up the senate and not allowing the so called peoples work to go forward.

The GOP uses it against the Democrats in 06 and pick up more senate seats.

Shudder!:scared: :nuke: :thumbsdown:

[ProudDad]

21. It's only scary

if we believe we're powerless.

We aren't so I'm not scared...

Of course, I remember the days before the SCOTUS was a "friend". We did survive.

[emcguffie]

13. if/when we prove the election was stolen --

-- could that not provide a basis for dumping all of B***'s judges? I mean, if he wasn't elected, how can he nominate judges? Especially to the Supreme Court?

I think no matter what, even if he's impeached and kicked out, we still have to prove the election was stolen.

[ProudDad]

17. The law

is what 5 robed judges on the SCOTUS say it is.

They selected him, I doubt that they'd fire themselves because he's illegitimate.

The REALITY is we have the power if we only use it.


Check this out for the concept of "withholding obedience", from the Keynote address at the 100th Plenary of the I.W.W.:

"The Zapatistas and the Bolivians: To Lead by Obeying

In recent years I have glimpsed for the first time a possible answer: what Quakers call "way opening." It begins with the Zapatistas, and has been further developed by the folks in the streets of Bolivia. Suppose the creation of a new society by the bourgeoisie is expressed in the equation, Rising Class plus New Institutions Within The Shell Of The Old = State Power. All these years I have been struggling with how workers could create new institutions within the shell of capitalism. What the Zapatistas have suggested, echoing an old Wobbly theme, is that the equation does not need to include the term "State Power." Perhaps we can change capitalism fundamentally without taking state power. Perhaps we can change capitalism from below."

http://www.clnews.org/SolidarityPapers/IWW%20Centenary%20Keynote%20Speech%20-%20Staughton%20Lynd.htm

[Czolgosz]

22. Do not lose hope. History is filled with men and women who were appointed

to the bench and who, when given a lifetime appointment and nothing but their place in history to consider, confounded the expectations of the persons who appointed them. Historically, this has not even been a rare occurrence. So, while is true that Bush will do everything in his power to appoint a narrow-minded right-wing activist judge, it is not a foregone conclusion that the nominee will meet Bush's expectations.

Ask yourself -- what has Bush attempted that he didn't foul up?

How likely is it that Bush will succeed in packing the court with his own brand of ideologues when his father, Reagan, and Eisenhower (far smarter Republicans with records of more successful accomplishments) could not fully achieve this task?

[ProudDad]

23. This is true

can you say "Souter", children. I'm sure bush one has felt the same frustrations as Eisenhower did after he appointed Earl Warren.

However, trusting in the unintentional consequences would not be as powerful as organizing for direct action against the economic system that props up these bastards...

[Czolgosz]

24. Souter is a good example of a judge who confounded expectations.

Significantly, it is important to contrast Souter with Kennedy and O'Connor. While Souter was truly more moderate than expected, sometimes people wrongly say the same thing about Kennedy and O'Connor and -- in truth -- Kennedy and O'Connor have performed nearly as expected. Some people wrongly believe that Kennedy and O'Connor have moderated over time, but they have remained consistent while it have been the Republican party (and the lower federal court judges appointed by the Republican party) which has moved to the right -- giving a false impression that O'Connor and Kennedy have moderated.

[Hippo_Tron]

27. I think Roe v Wade is the one exception

I would imagine that Raygun wanted to appoint somebody who was against Roe. But even Raygun's Republican party was more moderate than Bush's Republican party.

[formernaderite]

25. It may actually engage all the non-voters for once and all...

because, you can try and persuade someone that the issues matter, but until they understand personally how these rights affect their lives...nothing changes. I could see all these previously disinterested non voters helping pass constitutional amendments which would put certain issues to rest.

[Chicago Democrat]

26. I tend to agree. A Nazi-like Supreme court helps us politically!

God help us.





God Save The USA!

[proud patriot]

28. sad it has come to this

but I do agree with you :think:

[leanin_green]

29. It sounds good and all, but. . .

you need to take something into consideration. Americans, for the most part(and that includes us working stiffs), won't rise to the occasion until it hurts them personally. For all our ranting and raving and claims of being a "great and compassionate nation," America is essentially self-interested, self-centered and isolationist. Look at your history(because you can believe the neo-cons have). We don't get involved in world affairs until it hurts us or some great act against our interests stirs us to anger and the "need for retribution." Consider, Pearl Harbor: WWII, Gulf of Tonken: Vietnam(and that was the beginning of the fabrication methodology), 9/11: Afganistan, Iraq. I'm sure there are other examples, but you get my meaning. I mean, look at us on DU. We sit at computers using electricity, in air-conditioned homes, probably with a T.V. on someplace, writing about national and world affairs. It's a good life that not many would give up easily. But as long as we're able to continue in the lifestyles we've grown accustomed too, then I don't see much in the way of mass movements or the like. That's why people stand on soap boxes at corners and holler. How many just walk on by? Until it hurts, no one has the time and it's not their problem.

[Mountainman]

30. That's the point. A right wing court will make all working stiffs hurt.

It won't just be about gays and abortion. Once the right wins those battles the rich ruling class will use the courts to hurt even repuke working stiffs.

That is the great irony in all of this. The freepers are so stupid that they will trade winning on abortion with losing everything they hold dear. The rich ruling class has no more need for freepers than they do for us.

The working right wing will vote against their own best interests because they have drunk the cool aid but when they hurt they will begin to look elsewhere.

[leanin_green]

31. Well, you just seemed to agree with me, I think.

My point IS the fact that nothing changes in this country until it hurts. So, until the masses are in pain from all this crazy shit the RW is dreaming up, then all remains the same.

[Mountainman]

32. I do agree with you. It is the natural course of things.

We had the courts for a long time now they will get them and in the future we will get them back. Not in my life time I think.

[ProudDad]

33. True, true

I mainly wanted to put the thought out there, get the ball rolling so to speak.

It's inevitable that the court's going to move way far to the right (toward the wrong) and we've got to stay strong and fight back.

Don't waste time mourning, Organize... Joe Hill

http://www.kued.org/joehill/story/index.html

[CTLawGuy]

34. Wow, ralph nader posts on DU

I didn't realize....



All kidding aside, it's just like nader saying bush being elected was a good thing, because it would "bring back the left."

[ProudDad]

35. Ok, ok.

I shouldn't have written that it's a "good thing".

It's a rotten, horrible, evil thing. And I don't think we're going to be able to stop it happening. I don't think the Dems have enough spine to stop it happening.

I was primarily asking (and answering with a suggestion as to) What do we do now?

Thanks all for responding. It's been interesting.

[ProudDad]

36. Uh, What did you mean by Ralph Nader posts on DU?

[CTLawGuy]

38. the OP sounded like Nader

who said that it would be good if bush gets elected in 2000 because things have to get worse before they can get better.

[funflower]

37. Don't know if we'll see general strikes, but a far(ther) right SCOTUS

will wake up the populace and make them understand they have to control their legislators because the Supreme will not do it for them.

[ProudDad]

40. We also have to learn how to control

our own economic reality as well.

We must convince a critical mass of the population that the 2% at the top who own and control the governments, courts and legislatures (under the current election finance laws) don't own our lives or our actions.

We can withhold our obedience and consent. We can withhold our dollars and cents.

We can begin by totally rethinking the ultra-consumer addictions we've been programmed to have and that color our lives.

We need basic housing, basic health care, adequate food and spiritual support -- a reason for living. We sure as hell DON'T need SUV's, Wal-Mart, cable TV's drivel and Tiffany's...

[funflower]

41. Agreed with all! Losing the consumer addiction is empowering.

:toast:

[Geek_Girl]

42. I agree with you except for one point,

Is the American public smart enough and motivated enough to do anything about it. My observations over the last couple of decades would tell me the American public won't do a damn thing.