Naomi Klein on Building a real LEFT --

[defendandprotect]

Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Naomi Klein, and Invisible People

"We have to build that independent left. It has to be so strong and so radical and so militant and so powerful that it becomes irresistible."

Who better to say such a thing than Naomi Klein, Nation columnist, author of The Shock Doctrine and No Logo, and longtime rabblerouser? Naomi makes a special visit to the GRITtv studio to talk about the recent G20 meetings in her hometown of Toronto, about Obama's recent return to a kind of populism, the looming midterm elections in the U.S., her reporting on the BP disaster in the Gulf, and what we can do to channel the growing rage in this country and in the world into a true progressive movement.

Naomi Klein noted as well, "We don't have the ability to make the economically disposed-of people visible." Indeed, all over the country people are struggling just to survive in the current economic climate. Invisible People is a project aimed at doing just what Klein asked--making those people visible again. In this clip, they bring us the story of Jean and her kids.


http://www.grittv.org/2010/09/13/melissa-harris-lacewell-naomi-klein-and-invisible-people/

[BeFree]

1. Jobs

We could hire all us unemployed to sit on juries for all the gawd damned crooked politicians.

Not only would it put cash in our pockets, but we'd all become educated as to just how gawd damn crooked the politicians are.

In fact, we should have People's Courts set up across the country whose sole purpose would be to try the gawd damn crooked politicians.

[movonne]

2. Your jobs program is one of the best I have heard....Lets start

with the worst offenders the repubs...

[mmonk]

3. Best idea ever.

[another saigon]

11. I like it!

:applause:

[Usrename]

25. I like it.

I'd pay money, if I had any, to get that job. \

:thumbsup:

[leftstreet]

44. Excellent idea!

[wildbilln864]

4. k&r! nt

[bherrera]

5. Naomi Klein lacks pragmatism

This proposal is very weak. They can build an independent left, and it can be radical, and it will not have very much support because extreme left positions are not very popular with the general population. Extreme left causes can only be disguised until power is obtained, then democracy can be disregarded, and the extreme left cause can be imposed. The extreme right is in the same position, put in the opposite pole, they have to disguise themselves, then they emerge into power, and abandon democracy, to impose their ideas. This is what history has been showing.

[BeFree]

6. Examples please.

"...extreme left positions are not very popular with the general population.""

[bherrera]

13. Everywhere

I can't recall a communist winning a general election in a nation, which was held in a free and fair system, and where the communist said he was a communist trying to implement communism. This shows an extreme left position is not popular. The same applies to an extreme right position, of course. Extreme left positions are usually proposed by individuals who lack a clear understanding of economics and modern society.

[L0oniX]

49. Communist??? WTF ...Put down the crack pipe.

[blindpig]

53. Wow, it's Mr Koolaid.

No one in modern history has understood economics better than Karl Marx.

The KKE of Greece is probably the strongest party over there right now.

'The world's largest democracy', India, regularly elects communists, as do France, Italy and other nations.

It is likely impossible for you to understand, being under the influence, but communists have much greater respect for democracy than capitalists.

[Donnachaidh]

7. oh please

links to back up that ass-stat? :eyes:

[kentuck]

8. yeah, could you give just one of two examples...

of those "extreme left positions"?

[another saigon]

10. Social Security and Medicare?

would they be in this catagory of yours?

"extreme left positions are not very popular with the general population."

I consider extreme left as anarchy. I do not think I even know an anarchist.

[w4rma]

12. You have much to learn about left (actual left) politics, Padawan. (nt)

[bherrera]

19. Hard Left?

As she mentions it, she said hard left right? I think of Karl Marx, Mao Ze dong, Fidel Castro, and Kim Il Sung. What are your ideas?

[Kalyke]

43. Quick Test:

1. Are you in favor of tariff's that would limit the amount of products coming in from other countries, thus bringing back manufacturing to the United States?
2. Are you in favor of national healthcare insurance (single-payer)?
3. Are in favor of better-regulated industry to protect both people and the environment?
4. Are you in favor of returning the taxes on the wealthiest 1 percent to at least 39 percent (and possibly even as high as 72 percent)?
5. Are you in favor of a law stating that corporations are not people?

If you answered "yes" to all those questions, then you're what the Republicans, the DLCers and the corporate media refer to as "hard left."

[L0oniX]

50. Crack heads are leftists too. Please add that to your sad uninformed list.

[mmonk]

15. So do the corporatists.

[Peace Patriot]

17. bherrera, you have discredited yourself with your comparison of Hugo Chavez to Adolph Hitler...

--a comparison that Donald Rumsfeld also made...

Here's Rumfeld (comparing Chavez to Adolph Hitler)...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11159503/

Here's you (doing the same)
(first comment, para 4) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x40695

----------------------

This totally off-the-wall, extremist statement--comparing a genuinely elected leader, Hugo Chavez, who hasn't harmed ANYBODY, and has done much good--to the most hated and reviled genocidal monster in modern history--Adolph Hitler--may tell us something about the workings of projection and, at the very least, tells us that you don't have facts and can't back up your assertions, and have to resort to pushing fear buttons with wild, emotion-laden statements that are empty of any real content.

Your comments, in short, are a form of "know-nothing-ism"--a rightwing mental handicap that blocks reality out of the victim's mind and makes the victim unable to absorb facts--such as the fact that Chavez has harmed no one, or the fact that Chavez and his government have cut poverty by half, in Venezuela, and extreme poverty by more than 70%--and, in doing so, were doing the will of the people of Venezuela as expressed in honest, transparent, internationally monitored elections--or the fact that the Chavez government produced astonishing economic growth during the 2003 to 2008 period, with the most growth in the private sector.

Those who know these and other facts don't accept your corpo-fascist creation of "Chavez the dictator," so you leap to the extreme of Adolph Hitler, as if to say that those of us who know facts and hold more temperate views are supporting Adolph Hitler. That is the only weapon you have with which to assert your "know-nothing" views. You don't have facts. You don't respect facts. You spout a lot of baseless rightwing nonsense. And, when challenged, you double-down on your hard-wired, limited set of rightwing "talking points" and make yourself even more absurd.

Yours is a dangerous sort of thinking when wedded with great power (as with Rumsfeld). Standing alone, without power, it is just pathetic and pitiable. I wonder what you are doing in a forum for progressive U.S. Democrats but your comments are useful, in a way, as they demonstrate the lack of depth, rationality and analytical ability that our corporate rulers and war profiteers find it so easy to manipulate.

[another saigon]

20. As far as information from SA

REAL truth! I always read your posts. Thank you PP.

:yourock:

[defendandprotect]

32. No -- Social Security is the extreme left vs corporate fascism today --

Do you actually know anyone who is against Social Security who isn't in the upper

1%-5% wealth brackets?

The right wing is violent and radical -- they'd take us back to child labor in a second!

[Radical Activist]

9. Yes. The media will ignore progressive movements and messages.

Even when those messages come from Obama.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[mmonk]

16. What is white hatred?

To me the false left are the ones that pretend to be progressive but are really working within the parameters of corporate control such as the third way.

[kentuck]

18. There is a very strong left in this Party...

that historically votes with the Democratic Party.

"white hatred"? What the hell are you talking about? If you're going to discuss issues on DU, at least come armed with a rational mind.

[glitch]

30. That should be listed as one of the DU rules: "come armed with a rational mind" nt

[Peace Patriot]

21. Puzzling statements, "controlthepast"!

The left has to be "indivisible"?

--

"No real left depends upon a coalition. if you cannot have a solid majority faction that share a substantial common interest, and are indivisible, you cannot have a left."

---

???

---

Let me just give you some examples of highly successful leftist movements--movements that have elected presidents and governments--that are comprised of many different social movements and interests, including Indigenous peoples, racial minorities, women's groups, gay rights groups, environmental groups, labor leaders, workers, street vendors, community activists in very poor neighborhoods, human rights activists, "liberation theology" priests and nuns, artists, students, academics, intellectuals, leftist economists, professionals and business people of various kinds, and even soldiers...

Venezuela
Bolivia
Ecuador
Paraguay
Uruguay
Argentina
Brazil
Nicaragua

It takes time. It takes great attention to democratic institutions such as fair elections. It takes a lot of organizing. It takes, often, great courage. But all of the above types of groups and people have been knit together into overarching leftist movements that have altered the political landscape of Latin America in a very dramatic fashion over the last decade.

It has happened there. It can happen here. Your condemnation of the process of coalition building seems quite blind to me, as to how a strong leftist movement is really created. Sometimes these wildly "divisible" groups and people have come together over one issue--such as the privatization of water in Bolivia, or the "neo-liberal" crashing of the economy in Argentina. They do have common interests and goals. And unified action is, of course, very important in specific circumstances, and in regard to specific strategies. But to require lockstep, "indivisible" unity means that IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. The left is naturally fractious because it represents almost everybody. You cannot expect a "solid majority faction" to be "indivisible"--most especially not in a country as diverse as the United States.

And how do you build this "solid majority faction" except from its parts? Perhaps I misunderstand you, but a majority is built out of people, starting at the grass roots level, who have many and diverse issues that prompt them to come to a political meeting, or to organize a protest, or to go out in the street and hand out leaflets or knock on doors, or--these days--to educate, inform and organize on the internet.

Granted, the U.S. is a particularly difficult place to organize, and has been especially targeted by multinational corporations and war profiteers with intense propaganda and fake democracy. But that doesn't mean that a "solid majority faction" can't be created. It just takes time, serious grass roots organizing, and fair and transparent vote counting, and I would add, thinking big--the main lessons of the Latin American leftist revolution.

I'm beginning to think that I HAVE misunderstood you. But when you make sweeping statements like "there cannot be a real left in america," I balk. I'm sure there were plenty of naysayers in Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador and these other countries ten years ago, or fifteen years ago, who said, 'Give it up! It'll never happen here!' For this reason. For that reason. Because there didn't seem to be a "solid majority faction," or whatever. (Look at Paraguay, for heavens' sakes--with the most fractious left in the world! THEY pulled together.) When you say that something is not possible, for some vague ideological or sociological reason--or for what seems to me to be an illogical reason, that you can't create "a solid majority faction" because you don't have a "solid majority faction"--then I say that you haven't thought this through. A strong leftist movement can ALWAYS happen. But if you put an ideological or a sociological point first, and people second, then maybe you don't have the sympathy necessary to see HOW it can happen here. You cannot impose an ideological or sociological precept on PEOPLE. And you also can't always extrapolate from one country or region to another, or one culture to another.

I realize this, in regard to the successful Latin American leftist movements. There are differences among L/A countries, and differences between those countries, and that region, and the U.S.A. Still, there is enough commonality among these various L/A leftist movements--which in fact comprise a general regional movement toward regional integration, independence and social justice--and there are sufficient common institutional features and common aspirations between L/A. democracies and our own, that I think that looking at how Latin Americans have done it is quite useful and applicable here, at least in some respects. (Certainly transparent vote counting is one of them--and that is an issue that could mobilize substantial numbers of north Americans, and could be the spark--like water was, in Bolivia--for a general uprising against corporate rule.)

You are not thinking creatively enough, it seems to me. You're just condemning something (I'm not sure what) like naysayers everywhere, prior to a revolution. You are saying that there can be no revolution because there is not yet a revolution. Well, yeah. Things are bit hopeless looking in the U.S. So what? Did that ever stop a revolution before, once the people found a way--in whatever conditions they found themselves in--to make one?

One other thing I want to ask you about--besides asking you to re-explain your point about "a solid majority faction"--is this comment: "And the fact that white-hatred is a substantial plank in the democratic party and in klein's base, dooms leftism in america. Again, it is the poison pill injected into the 'false left' by the rich, a poison pill that has killed leftism in america."

What are you talking about? It is so vague that I really don't get it. "White hatred is a substantial plank...in klein's base?" And who do you mean by "klein's base"? Her readers? That could be anybody. People who admire her writing? People who quote it? Who are the people in this "base" and how do you conclude that they exhibit "white hatred"? I presume you mean whites hating those with dark skin. Do you mean that? You got anything to back that up--that whoever you mean by "klein's base" are white racists? It seems off-the-wall and needs substantiation.

It just occurred to me that you might mean the Democratic Party leadership's targeting of the most progressive members of the Black Caucus in Congress? Is that what you are referring to? If so, what has that to do with "klein's base" (whatever that is), or the Democratic Party "base," for that matter? I truly do not understand this remark. Please explain.

[hfojvt]

36. didn't see the deleted post

but I am figuring that "white hatred" means that the white people are hated, not, as you assume that the white people are hating. Your assumption might even be evidence of that white hatred. Let's not pretend that it does not exist in the left and the pseudo-left.

[Peace Patriot]

37. You could be right that the deleted poster meant hatred OF whites.

The comment was so poorly written and so vague that it was impossible to understand any of it very well. But where do you get off suggesting that I hate whites on the basis of my effort to understand this poster's remarks? Please apologize!

And as for "the left and the psuedo-left" hating whites, you yourself are being as cryptic and uninformative as the deleted poster. What do you mean by "the left"? What do you mean by "the psuedo-left"? What evidence do you have that, whatever you mean by these things, the people involved hate whites? Making a broad insinuation of racism against the political left, on the vague, rhetorical basis of "let's not pretend that it does no exist," will not do.

[hfojvt]

42. so there is no such thing as the left?

What I mean by the left is - the left blogosphere. You know, DU, DKos, Firedoglake, Hubbalaboo, etc. Pseudo-left is sort of a Somerby term, by which he means those who play the left on TV or in the papers - Ed Schulz, KeithO, Rachel, LarryO, our own Richard Wolffe, Eugene Robinson, Bob Herbert, etc., etc.

As for the evidence, puh-lease. Are you saying that you do not read DU? That you do not notice white people being trashed here on a regular basis? First, they are trashed for having genocidal and slave-owning ancestors even though most white people did not own slaves even in 1860. Then they are trashed as racists. Because, after all, only a racist would attack a black President and call him names. Then they are trashed as racists and xenophobes for not wanting open borders. Almost whenever there is a new issue or debate, it is the forces of good on one side and the forces of racism, bigotry and xenophobia on the other side, and, by a happy circumstance, the majority of the other side happen to by white.

"Next week, we plan to continue our discussion of the liberal world’s love of its bombs—its R-bombs, X-bombs, N-bombs, I-bombs and even its S, M and B and H-bombs. For today, we thought we might take a moment to review the way our gods react to the rabble. A godly professor dropped X- and E-bombs when confronted with their lowly conduct. And Digby knew what she was seeing, as this great god always does. In this passage, she is discussing the Cordoba House matter:

DIGBY (8/12/10): I think the thing that's most jarring about this controversy—and the similar protests around the country—is that it's happening eight years after the fact. It would have made far more sense in the immediate aftermath, but the nation managed to resist this by and large (with some very notable exceptions.) My assumption is that this was because the president and the Republicans kept a leash on their neanderthals, which they are clearly failing to do now. Indeed, they have joined them.

And obviously, this has something to do with it. (Whether they are projecting their bigotry against African Americans on to Muslims or their bigotry against Muslims onto African Americans remains an open question. Not that it really matters.)

But a large majority of the country don't think this cultural center project should happen, and people all over the country are protesting the building of mosques in their neighborhoods suddenly, so it isn't just wing-nuts letting their most outlandish freaks' flags fly in NYC. Has this know-nothing hostility been out there all along and was just held back by the GOP establishment or is it just plain old racism and xenophobia come to the surface in an environment which welcomes it?"

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh081310.shtml

"Let’s face it: This has always been the principal “joy of liberalism.” Among a certain type of white pseudo-liberal, the very point of being a liberal is the opportunity it gives us to name-call working-class whites. This is our one undeniable skill—and it reaches its fullest flower when we get to call them racists. Indeed, a certain type of white pseudo-liberal lives for the pleasures this practice provides. It’s the only political play we seem to know. We’re like a football team which runs off right tackle every play—then wonders why it can’t score."

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh081209.shtml

You have really never seen this on DU? Just keep reading. You will see it within a few days. Maybe here with 172!! Rs http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=442480&mesg_id=442480

[druidity33]

22. non-majoritarian?

You got wise?

...puhleeze...

:eyes:

[defendandprotect]

33. You are claiming that "White Hatred" is a plank in the Democratic Party -- ????

And the fact that

white-hatred is a substantial plank in the democratic party

and in klein's base, dooms leftism in america.

[EFerrari]

46. Same poster put up the same sentiment yesterday on another thread. n/t

[NJmaverick]

23. Easy for Naomi to make advance these destructive ideas

being Canadian she doesn't have to live with the inevitable consequences of a GOP takeover, which is exactly what her plan will bring.

[bherrera]

26. She lacks pragmatism

I think she is is a political amateur. Evidently doesn't realize how disconnected she is from the typical US citizen. These hard left fanatics are usually of the same type, they are idealists with no idea of how to win an election.

[harun]

27. And spineless Democrat's like you are the reason we don't see real change.

[defendandprotect]

34. The GOP uses their right winger critics to move their party and government to the RIGHT ....

Obama/Dems/Raham/Gibbs use their liberal/progressive critics NOT to move their party

and agenda to the LEFT ... but rather to insult them -- shun them -- and try to get

them to go away!!!

Amazing, isn't it!!??

[harun]

45. It's horrifying. I have seen politicians and the media moving more to the right for decades

and I don't see any slowing.

People aren't moving as far to the right as the politicians, some of them seeing the crash coming from that ideology but politically it is ridiculous.

[defendandprotect]

56. America is a LIBERAL nation .... and the proof of that is that the right wing...

has to control ALL of media -- even publishing houses!!

AND, let's be frank, the only way the right wing can rise is thru political violene --

and we've had 50+ years of that. Add in stolen elections with computer hacking --

and keep in mind that the LARGE computers used by MSM and the voting computers go back

to the mid-late-1960's ....

just about the time America was passing the Voting Rights Act --

I'd question every election back to Nixon/Humphrey -- and it was another squeaker.

Nixon also pulled something like Reagan's "October Surprise" -- in back channeling with

contacts to keep the Vietnam peace talks from going forward, promising that they'd get a

better deal if he were president!

Everything the right wing does is faked -- as Dick Cheney said .... "We create the reality

and everyone else lives it!" --

GOP gave start up funding in 1980 for the Christian Coalition --

Richard Scaife funded Dobson's organization -- and other wealthy Repugs funded Bauer's org.


Keep in mind that the LARGE computers used by MSM gave them new powers ... to PREDICT and

CALL elections. Prior to that time they could only report ACTUAL vote tallies. What we

saw in 2000 was simply a reversal of those new powers.

[L0oniX]

47. +1

[defendandprotect]

35. Unfortunately, it is Obama's Wall Street "team" and DLC/Rahm who are "disconnected"

from the public --

Remember 76%+ of Americans wanted single payer universal health care run by government --

and the numbers were still growing as Obama/Baucus and the health care industry stomped

our best chance yet for MEDICARE FOR ALL into the ground!

[Lost4words]

40. if its follow Naomi or follow you, I'll go with Ms Klein

I remember 1968, things were not changing very quickly until cities began to burn, I guess those folks didnt know much either.

we no longer need the SOFT LEFT it has changed NOTHING

[southmost]

24. we have a real left in this country,

and since when is having a government which works for the general public (instead of corporate interests) considered 'extreme left'?!

What the left needs in this country is better access to media outlets.

[Lost4words]

41. establishment left = establishment right ! nt

[Ignis]

28. K&R

It would be awfully sporting if those "moderates" who make it a practice to belittle and excoriate Ms. Klein would bother to read her work.

[Uncle Joe]

29. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, defendandprotect.

[robdogbucky]

31. Look! It's Naomi Klein! What time is it?

Time to bash the female lefty when she speaks.

Usual suspects saying the usual useless one-liners in response to an actual journalist with an actual researched published opinion.

Third one this week. That's a trifecta!

Smear, smear, smear. Fear, fear, fear. Don't speak of a progressive left movement, the GOP might hear about it. Fear, fear, fear. Left woman speaks out. Must discredit IBTL. Cannot tolerate any dissent. Achtung! Must conform to DLC line. Achtung! No dissent from the DLC line.


Women not welcome. Stay away. Go find your own party. We are the DLC! Achtung!



Sheeeesh

[lonestarnot]

39. Where's your link?

[robdogbucky]

51. where's my link to what?

Are you being cute?

If you mean where is my link to those threads, aside from the smearing on here re: naomi klein, those that smear AH and JH, then here ya go:

Is Arianna Huffington still a Republican?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9110807&mesg_id=9110807

Firedoglake does the Full Nader
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9103950&mesg_id=9103950



Clown Car Contingent doing its best.

But then you knew that already din't ya?

DU Google is your friend.




Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[L0oniX]

48. +1

[Lost4words]

38. I would follow Naomi Klein into a burning building!

I have read her books and watched her interviews. She makes me proud to be human, I have great admiration and respect for this young woman.


Melissa Harris-Lacewell is tops as well!

thanks for posting this! :hi:

[Javaman]

52. While I completely agree with Naomi Klein, what we lack is...

big backers like the scumbag koch brothers.

[snooper2]

54. So this "new left" would be a mirror of the teabaggers, full of truthers

and folks who think we should have no military...

that would be fun to watch

[xchrom]

55. naomi is spot on -- i've witnessed since the sixties the lefts ability to organize

effectively and efficiently over the issue of war -- an umbrella that brings in all kinds of folk --

and then watch that disappear when that issue is deemed over for those masses.


if all those people could be kept together for issues on poverty, taxation, education, the environment -- it would be unstoppable.