One of my gifts, as a person living with ADD is that every so often, I have to turn off the outside world for a while, and just do nothing. That's where I've been for the last few weeks.
When I get like that, it often takes something a little special to get me off my ass and back into my version of a "productive" mode. This time around, it was an email from Media Matters for America, announcing the publication of their list of candidates for the worst (best?, most effective?) media misinformation of 2007.
While the list mostly features the standup comics of the right --Billy O', Ann Coulter, Pat Robertson (whose senile irrelevance becomes increasingly embarrassing to watch with each news cycle) and that ilk-- there's some of the usual genuinely scary stuff in there, too. It's a good read.
All in all, it's been an interesting year in the news biz, and I like to think that if I stand back far enough there's a lot that's happened this year that gives this tired old hippie a fresh shot of optimism that the herd is starting to wake up. And even more encouraging, they are not even slightly amused at where it is that they find themselves. -- But that's another session at the keyboard.
Today, I'm writing to announce that I have THE solution to the self-inflicted crisis our traditional media has landed itself in*.
Actually, I've had it since the autumn of 2001, but nobody implemented it then, when it might have prevented an awful lot of the mess our country is in, and its time quickly passed. Now, the herd is waking up, and once again we're at a point where just one major publisher with sufficient moxie (and resources) could start the ball rolling on a wonderful project the could contribute enormously to shortening and easing the pain of our nation's recovery.
Here's what I would have done in the fall of 2001 if I were Arthur Sulzberger, Jr: I would have ordered the creation of a new front-page feature in all the Times newspapers called "Reality Check." Then, I would have networked with all my buddies in the publishing business to participate in the project. I even would have syndicated the feature and offered it absolutely free to any publication that wanted to carry it.
The job of the newly-created Reality Editor would be to commission a major nationwide poll (weekly? bi-weekly?) on the most important recent news events, measuring how accurately the public perception of these events coincides with what actually happened. The results of this poll, along with clarifying links and resultant correspondence (accompanied by further clarifying links when necessary) would be published prominently daily until the next poll is conducted.
I can see something like this spreading to a point where it's carried in nearly every fairly responsible publication in the country.
I can see it sparking all sorts of discussion and perhaps opening some minds along the way.
My home in America is in a mid-sized university town -- home to the University of Illinois. The publisher of the local rag and I have difficulty agreeing on the day of the week, let alone anything political, but he is (as, I suspect, are the majority of his brethren) a man with a great love of the constitution, and I can see even the Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette signing onto a project like this if it were done properly.
This is something that our traditional press ought to have been doing all along --who knows what it might have prevented?
How many Americans still believe that Sadam Husein had something to do with the attack on the World Trade Center?
How different might that number be if our traditional media had been doing their job from the get-go?
And, now, with the herd waking up, is a great time for something like Reality Check to really catch on. The right-wing noise machine is losing its effectiveness (as witness a good half the MM list being devoted to the comedians of the right), and a bold publisher (I recommend Time Magazine as a penance for their recent Joe Klein FISA fiasco.) could seize the opportunity and use a feature like this to keep the difference between the neocon spin machine and the real world fresh in its minds.
----------
*the increasingly large distance between reportage and what's actually happening in the real world, created by the tendency of the press to take and publish pronouncements from the current administration and their pals on the Right at face value.
It's Time For America To Rehabilitate the Term "Fascism"
If the Bush administration should be credited with having perfectly succeeded in any way, it ought to be in having elevated the word "fascism" from the realms of hyperbole to the level of respectability in common usage.
In his farewell contribution to Salon, pundit Sidney Blumenthal offers a chilling statement of the enormity of just what exactly is at stake in the 2008 presidential election. You can read the entire article here*, and I recommend that you do. The following excerpts are from the section in which he describes the current Republican view of the presidency.
And that's the problem.
In America, there is an often unspoken taboo on its use, perhaps based on our belief that fascism is the antithesis of All Things American. In the history of the web, calling someone a fascist or accusing them of advocating fascism generally has meant the end of that thread of discussion -- it being clear that the discussion had degenerated into nothing more than hyperbolic name-calling.
I'm afraid that when many Americans think of fascism, they tend to think in terms only of actualized fascist states: Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Franco's Spain, etc., not recognizing that fascism is first of all, a philosophy, from which a full blown fascist state will grow when a sufficient percentage of the populace become sufficiently scared.
The danger of allowing this taboo to prevail in the reality-based world of 2007-08 America is that it prevents Americans from discussing fascism when the real thing comes along. And it has come along. Just listen to the leading Republican candidates. They sound more like they're running for the post of Generalisimo of a fascist state than for President of the United States. Their presidential debates are reminiscent of the old Saturday Night Live skit "Quien es mas macho?" Unfortunately, in the real world, this kind of stuff is anything but funny.
Here in Europe, we use the word "fascism" freely . . . and - generally - responsibly and accurately. Fascism exists. Its practitioners and advocates are organized, use the term "fascist" shamelessly, and run candidates in local and national elections -- some of whom are actually elected.
My friends and neighbors here in Spain have clear memories of the Franco days, and any discussion with them of American politics today inevitably leads to frightening comparisons.
It's high time for Americans to start talking that way, too.
*Subscription or viewing of a brief commercial required
In his farewell contribution to Salon, pundit Sidney Blumenthal offers a chilling statement of the enormity of just what exactly is at stake in the 2008 presidential election. You can read the entire article here*, and I recommend that you do. The following excerpts are from the section in which he describes the current Republican view of the presidency.
Despite the obvious shortcomings of his policies, [Bush] has startlingly succeeded in reshaping the executive into an unaccountable imperial presidency. And Bush's presidency is now accepted as the only acceptable version for major Republican candidates who aspire to succeed him. All of them have pledged to extend its arbitrary powers. Their embrace of the imperial presidency makes the 2008 election a turning point in constitutional government.There is a word for all this: Fascism. I kept waiting for it from Blumenthal, but alas . . . .- - - - -Two models of the presidency are at odds, one whose founding father was George Washington, the other whose founding father was Richard Nixon.- - - - -The imperial president must by definition be an infallible leader. Only he can determine what is a mistake because he is infallible. Stephen Bradbury, the acting director of OLC in the Justice Department who wrote secret memos justifying the torture policy in 2005, defined this Bush doctrine in congressional testimony in 2006: "The president is always right."- - - - -Every executive policy does not exist on its own merit but as part of an overarching plan to establish an executive who rules by fiat. Enforcing these policies is intended to break down resistance to aggrandizing unaccountable power for the presidency. Warrantless domestic surveillance is a case in point.- - - - -Torture is the linchpin of the new Republican argument on presidential power. Abuse of detainees is the metaphor for beguiling the public into supporting abuse of the presidency. The sadomasochistic ecstasy of torture and the thrill of vengeance are the ultimate appeal of the party of torture. . . . This novel form of government, never before installed in the U.S., despite precursors from Nixon's planned seizure of powers, is being cemented into place so that its penetrability and removal will become extraordinarily difficult. Those who undertake the task of rebuilding the structure will be vulnerable to harsh political attacks as unpatriotic and subversive.
And that's the problem.
In America, there is an often unspoken taboo on its use, perhaps based on our belief that fascism is the antithesis of All Things American. In the history of the web, calling someone a fascist or accusing them of advocating fascism generally has meant the end of that thread of discussion -- it being clear that the discussion had degenerated into nothing more than hyperbolic name-calling.
I'm afraid that when many Americans think of fascism, they tend to think in terms only of actualized fascist states: Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Franco's Spain, etc., not recognizing that fascism is first of all, a philosophy, from which a full blown fascist state will grow when a sufficient percentage of the populace become sufficiently scared.
The danger of allowing this taboo to prevail in the reality-based world of 2007-08 America is that it prevents Americans from discussing fascism when the real thing comes along. And it has come along. Just listen to the leading Republican candidates. They sound more like they're running for the post of Generalisimo of a fascist state than for President of the United States. Their presidential debates are reminiscent of the old Saturday Night Live skit "Quien es mas macho?" Unfortunately, in the real world, this kind of stuff is anything but funny.
Here in Europe, we use the word "fascism" freely . . . and - generally - responsibly and accurately. Fascism exists. Its practitioners and advocates are organized, use the term "fascist" shamelessly, and run candidates in local and national elections -- some of whom are actually elected.
My friends and neighbors here in Spain have clear memories of the Franco days, and any discussion with them of American politics today inevitably leads to frightening comparisons.
It's high time for Americans to start talking that way, too.
*Subscription or viewing of a brief commercial required
Home Again
Well, here it is, Tuesday, and I have spent the last week getting ready to return home and then making the trip. I returned via Madrid for the first time since the Madrid airport was under construction and a nightmare to traverse. I am happy to report that the "new" Madrid airport may be the nicest and easiest airport in Europe.
My little dog is thrilled to see me. I brought him new toys from the United States, and he has already picked out his favorite and is carrying it around everywhere he goes. But it seems that the most important thing to him at the moment is that Daddy's Home!
And now, it's time to sleep. I'll be back in this space some more tomorrow, and will get going on the Serious Stuff as soon as my head catches up with my body.
My little dog is thrilled to see me. I brought him new toys from the United States, and he has already picked out his favorite and is carrying it around everywhere he goes. But it seems that the most important thing to him at the moment is that Daddy's Home!
And now, it's time to sleep. I'll be back in this space some more tomorrow, and will get going on the Serious Stuff as soon as my head catches up with my body.
Wednesday Notes
I leave the U.S. for Spain on Monday, and I spent the day today running around town, taking care of odds and ends that need to be dealt with before I head for home. I don't expect to be writing much here before I go. I did have one brainstorm that I want to throw out for someone more enterprising than I.
I was driving along this afternoon, doing my errands, when I pulled up behind a car with a Giuliani '08 bumper sticker on its back window and it occurred to me that somebody needs to print up some stickers that say
for progressives to stick on any car with a Republican candidate's bumper sticker on it. I'll be the first to order a couple of dozen of them.
I was driving along this afternoon, doing my errands, when I pulled up behind a car with a Giuliani '08 bumper sticker on its back window and it occurred to me that somebody needs to print up some stickers that say
I've learned absolutely nothing in the last 7 years.
for progressives to stick on any car with a Republican candidate's bumper sticker on it. I'll be the first to order a couple of dozen of them.
Studs Terkel on Amnesty for Telecoms
If you have not had an opportunity to read this morning's New York Times op-ed by Chicago writer and oral historian Studs Terkel, you can find it here. Terkel is the ACLU of Illinois' lead plaintiff in the case against AT&T challenging telecom companies collaboration with the government in listening to telephone calls, reading emails and gathering customers personal records without a judicial order.
That case, along with numerous other similar cases from around the country, has been consolidated in federal court in San Francisco. Terkel's piece provides a terrific historical perspective for the current debate over legalizing massive data collection by the executive branch.
That case, along with numerous other similar cases from around the country, has been consolidated in federal court in San Francisco. Terkel's piece provides a terrific historical perspective for the current debate over legalizing massive data collection by the executive branch.
What We Call The News
The folks over at JibJab have put together a nice commentary on the state of the media in America.
My thanks to Josh Rorhscheib for suggesting the link. Sorry I didn't make it out to DC this trip.
My thanks to Josh Rorhscheib for suggesting the link. Sorry I didn't make it out to DC this trip.
Quote of the Day
Glenn Greenwald has a wonderful response to Fred Hiatt's pathetic plea in today's Washington Post for amnesty for the telecoms who helped Bush break the law by warrentless tapping of the phones of American citizens. The last paragraph of his post sums it all up for me:
The real point, of course, is that corporations -- just as is true for ordinary citizens and small companies -- can dramatically reduce their chances of being subjected to long, protracted litigation by obeying the law. Hiatt's rationale -- it's so unfair to make these poor corporations endure the costs of litigation -- would "justify" granting general amnesty to corporations for all illegal behavior, i.e., it would eviscerate the rule of law. We want there to be a price to pay when private actors violate the law. But the "price" which AT&T, Verizon and others are paying from "litigation costs" is so miniscule that to cite it as a reason to give amnesty is either incredibly ignorant or purposefully dishonest.
The Mobilization That Wasn't
I'm in the United States for six weeks, visiting friends and taking care of some business, and getting caught up on life in the US from right here on the ground. I'm near the end of week five at the moment, and I can tell you it's been an eye-opening experience. I'll share some of my observations in the next few days, but here's one thing for right now:
For those who don't believe that the mainstream media in America are culpable in Mr Bush's nasty little war, here's a message: Believe it!
If Americans were shown the same feed of CNN that we see in Europe (from Sky via Great Britain), things in this country would be a whole lot different today! And that's just CNN. If it were the BBC, we would be having a revolution. Speaking of which . . .
Did you know that there were demonstrations against the war on Iraq all over the United States today? You sure wouldn't if you depended on the news networks for information, although CNN did tell us (as late as 4 p.m. CDT) that United for Peace and Justice was organizing demonstrations for today. No coverage whatsoever of the tens and hundreds of thousands of Americans who were in the streets with chants and placards telling the current occupant and their congresscritters that they wanted the illegal occupation of Iraq to stop -- Now!
Incredible! But you're probably used to it.
Anyway, that was a digression from what I meant to write today. I mostly just wanted to say "hello" and welcome you to this blog. I've found a lot to be depressed about on this visit, but I've also seen a lot of things that make me think that things are looking up. I'll write more about both over the coming weeks. I return home to Spain on the 5th of November, and from there I'll continue to comment on events in America as seen from a distance.
Your comments or questions appreciated and welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
