Skip to main content

Trying to Bother

I have started a number of postings in the last few weeks without publishing anything. I get through half my thoughts and eventually find myself asking, "why bother?" Admittedly, I have been somewhat melancholy lately, thinking a lot about events in my life and my mother's passing birthday. Still, the source of my ennui and dissatisfaction lies elsewhere. Simply, I'm sick of talking about politics. I'm tired of feeling like I'm basically saying the same thing over and over. Although I write on different subjects, when it comes down to this administration, all I ever have to say on the matter is that all that they do is illegal or morally reprehensible; they are either very stupid, or very evil, or both; and they are breaking our nation and don't seem to notice or care. Pick a subject and essentially I could write the same statements and acurrately describe their conduct, whether it's the military, health care, tax cuts, or national security. So seriously, why bother?

I had an epiphany this weekend: it doesn't matter. Don't get me wrong, there are several important dialogues occuring. Without commenting on the tone or quality of the discussions I would say it's an important time in the sense that large numbers of Americans are engaged in discussing the principles of this nation and in essense what it means to be an American. It doesn't matter because unfortunately, they simply don't care. We are playing by the rules, waiting for the mid-term election, hoping the Dems will wake up and support censure, that the Republicans will begin to show some oversight and independence, educating and informing, waiting for impeachment. But they have no rules, no boundaries. This should be apparent with every revelation that we are somehow fortunate enough to receive. If there's a law they haven't broken, it's only because it hasn't gotten in their way yet. Donald Rumsfeld alone should be enough to show the country at-large that our collective opinions and desires mean nothing, our power is moot in the face of this administration.

To a great degree they have to ignore us, ignore everyone outside the administration. At this point all they seem to be able to do is defend their past bad and questionable actions, which means it's difficult to screw up anything new. However, the facade is cracking too quickly. They are defending themselves on so many fronts that something must break. They have clamped down on so much information, been able to testify without being under oath, been given a pass by the media for so long. But their own lies are starting to be used against them, and it's only a matter of time before someone in the administration has to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but. The saber rattling with Iran is a desperate defensive measure. It plays to his perceived strengths as the war president. Trouble on the homefront, low approval numbers, talk of impeachment, threaten to blow somebody up, fireworks take everyone's minds off our troubles.

We know by every expert estimate that Iran is at least ten years away from producing weapons grade uranium. We can't take their oil. There is no talk of committing ground forces, not that we have the forces to commit. We have no workable plans for containing the country after we bomb their research and military sites. Considering that Iran supposedly has 40,000 suicide bombers on call, that seems at least as important a consideration as the plans for post-war Iraq, which we also failed to consider. So beyond stirring up the proverbial hornets nest what purpose would bombing Iran serve? I'm no expert. Right now I'm not even particularly well read on the subject, but of course I have an opinion.

As we approach the mid-term elections, if Bush and the Republicans' political fortunes continue to fall it increases the likelihood that we will attack Iran, especially if it seems they might lose their majority in the house or senate. I think that they are gambling that we wouldn't impeach a president in the middle of a war. And an attack on Iran would be played as an extension of our never-ending war on terror. This might seem like a conspiracy theory but they have done unconscionable things in the past to protect themselves politically and the stakes have only grown. Is it so inconceivable that they might be so myopic as to focus on saving themselves in the short term despite the long term consequences to our security and international prestige? This is obviously a rhetorical question, because with this administration all that they do is illegal or morally reprehensible; they are either very stupid, or very evil, or both; and they are breaking our nation and don't seem to notice or care.

So when I say it doesn't matter, it doesn't unless we are willing to make this administration finally care about the will of the people.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

'Anti-racism', All Trap, No Honey: A Discourse About Discourse

One of the things that prevents me from writing more often is the sense that I'm just writing the same thing repeatedly from a slightly different angle. In a nutshell, all I'm saying is that moral idealism substituted for material goals will not lead to justice, but is an argument against materialism. I'm a dumb person's low rent Adolph Reed Jr. translator. I'm a "class reductionist" who understands that when the discourse is reduced to just class there's nothing as important as food, water and shelter that's left out. I often find myself contending with people who insist that there is, unable to name anything. They don't understand that they're making an argument against economic redistribution, or they don't care. There are no concrete manifestations of systemic racism or any oppression that are not dealt with through economic redistribution. When people say that economic redistribution won't end racism, what they mean is that

Anti-racism - Class = Status Quo: The Neoliberal Argument Against Coalition

I was approached a few months ago around the idea of collaborating to make the progressive case for reparations. I've said before that while the idea of reparations is morally appealing I don't believe in them as an immediate political project. It's not clear to me that it's possible to build a coalition around a reparative justice focused on just 13% of the population. Encouraged by a recent Twitter conversation that included economists Sandy Darrity and Darrick Hamilton where they suggested that saying reparations will never happen is cynical I've begun trying to think of them as an eventuality and lay out the steps to reaching them. Doing this has made clear that our understanding of reparations as a form of compensation to the descendants of the enslaved is not the reparative justice that we think it to be. If we were living with the kind of understanding of justice that made reparations possible we would not be a nation where war, healthcare, education, and cr

The Stories That Break Us, The Stories That Bind

Remember the mass shooter who planned and executed an attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando possibly because of his own unreconciled sexuality? It never happened. The mass shooting at The Pulse nightclub definitely happened, but the narrative around it was wrong from the start. I'm a poor consumer of mainstream news and still I was left with the erroneous impression that the sexual orientation of the victims was central to the event. It's understandable that even without consuming media one would conclude that this was an anti-gay hate crime. The victims were gay it happened in a gay nightclub. The story , like most of reality, is more complicated than the narratives we use to contain it. This illustrates the problem with a media more concerned with getting out the first just-so story that confirms our impressions and prejudices. It's worth pondering the ways in which this damages us. In the wake of the shooting, the media and public focused on certain details, many of which