A couple Salon reviews of the new book “Dispatches From The Culture Wars: How The Left Lost Teen Spirit” by Danny Goldberg seem to be getting pretty good play on that site - both are the lead stories today.
Interestingly in one of the reviews videogames, along with music, are mentioned as something the the democrats are attacking in a misguided policy of trying to attact ‘centrist’ voters and steal ‘family values’ from Republicans. That’s not what Democrats have traditionally stood for and it’s what’s cutting the legs out from under them.
Goldberg makes a pretty good point that big conservative contributors and corporate economic dominance of the political landscape is nothing new. What offset it was the charisma of the leadership and attractive populist messages of the left. By alienating younger voters as well as those tied into entertainment and the arts the left is turning away its original source of strength.
Personally, I don’t think that’s the whole problem but it’s a very important aspect of things. What is interesting to me is the idea that video gamers (and by extension computer gamers) could become a political demographic if strategists read this book, and it seems they might well. About damned time. Bye-bye Libermann.
Imus has been going on and on about this book. I do not, normally, have time to read books where I will actually learn something, but I think I will pick this up.
I was a huge Dem. back in the day and I do feel like they have lost their way. None of them, I repeat none of them, are representing the common man: me. I have no idea what they believe any longer and if there is something, they sure as fuck are not getting the message out very well. Check that, they do all firmly believe they know what is best for “the people”; whether the people are aware of what that is, is another story. They also believe staying in office by any means necessary is a must.
Maybe I will pick it up for my beach trip and bring it back up in the Book forum when I get back. Maybe by then someone will have also actually read Hillary’s “biography” and can correct my misrepresentation of what is and is not in it.
As a moderate (shut up, you damned Europeans, that IS too a conviction) with liberal human rights values, I feel totally unrepresented. I used to lean Democrat overall because, while both parties have been corrupted into political machines about a century, at least the “evil” quotient was either lower or better-hidden than with the Republicans.
But now it’s a choice between “evil” and “stumbling around in circles.” Some choice.
I believe that is what the book touches on (have not read the reviews linked to above yet…sorry) Denny. We have been deserted and we are searching for somewhere to put are votes…Libertarian…Green Party…Al SHarpton…they do not so much as match up with our values and beliefs as they are a damn sight better than to two groups of power/money whores that are entrenched in federal, state, and local governments.
Sorry if I derailed things. I will excuse myself until I read the book.
Quick question – does anyone have a link to a decent summary of what Lieberman has proposed re: violent video games? IIRC, it wasn’t a ban but some kind of retailer-based regulation (but I honestly can’t remember the details).
Sorry, didn’t provide a link - Salon does require subscriptions but sometimes free access is provided by a sponsor.
To tell the truth I don’t despise Lieberman as much as some folks do, well at least not for his stance on restricting M rated games - if I mistrust him it’s because of his ties to the insurance industry, but I do think that by sucking up to pollsters and ‘mavens’ as Goldberg puts it the Democrats are really putting themselves out of touch with any natural constituency.
You have to really claim some meaningful ground that will excite excitable people and then lead others to understand and embrace the issues you’re talking about. Otherwise you end up with lukewarm candidates in a desperate race to avoid alienating anyone rather than really running on ideas. The 2000 election was a huge national embarrasment for the Democrats and, IMHO, the country as a whole. The Republicans were running a well funded facade of a campaign while managing to keep the kooks and creeps quiet while the Democrats weren’t willing to take on the deeper issues that could well offend their own new corporate friends or any of the nebulous demographic groups, often with conflicting outlooks, in any key region.
If the nuts, or idealists, on either side are told to shut up for fear of alienating mainstream voters then how do those voters know what either party really stands for? How many folks that voted for Bush have the least clue what the official Republican platform is and visa versa?
The M rated thing…meh…big deal. My problem is he’s a J…what, the sherrif’s a N…
It is amazing how many of us feel, i dunno, lost when it comes to party allegiance. The stiffs available are bland at best and offensive at worst. If one would step out and take a stand on something, Dean maybe, I would probably throw my vote their way just on principle.
Just say some - thing!!! Offend people. I would never have voted for Jesse “The Body” in Minnesota, but at least he said and did what he felt and was elected by doing that. Minnesota is still standing as far as I know and maybe he made someone think by sparking debate rather than politicking to stay in office throughout his entire term. Same thing, but to a lesser extent with McCain. Not sure I could vote for him, but he will occasionally buck the Republican system and say some unpopular things.
Hooray for diversity. I am afraid we are moving to an All Thing government where everyone is sharing one brain and that brain keeps chanting “steady as she goes…change is bad…staus quo…”
Why do you say this? Is it because of his videogame stance? Do you actually know what he has proposed regarding video games? Do you know what Cheney actually stands for?
I don’t like Lieberman for various reasons, but none have to do with anything as inconsequential as videogames.
There was an interview with Harry Shearer on The Onion’s AV Club where they asked him why the right dominated talk radio, and he made a really interesting point. The people representing the left on radio are typically politicians like Mario Cuomo, wheras the big formerly 400 pound gorilla from the right Rush Limbaugh was originally a DJ. Guess who knows more about radio, how to reach people, how to draw in listeners, etc.?
The right attracts people because it sounds like the party of strength; I’ve rarely heard a passionate leftist not sound like a whiner.
Of course, it is hard to know what Cheney stands for because he is all but invisible in this administration. Does he leave his mad scientist bunker to do anything other than pounding that gavel occasionally in Congress? It has been established that he does not like revealing any information about himself or his actions as VP and the fact that he never makes a peep makes this cowpoke very, verrrrry nervous.
Why do you say this? Is it because of his videogame stance? Do you actually know what he has proposed regarding video games? Do you know what Cheney actually stands for?
I don’t like Lieberman for various reasons, but none have to do with anything as inconsequential as videogames.[/quote]
Oh sorry, I didn’t mean that to be taken as a serious comment. Well, not completely serious.
It’s just interesting how two parties, liberal and conservative, each of which at one time or another embraced the values of freedom, have both aimed themselves squarely at decidedly non-free ideals, for completely different reasons.
That’s rather self-defeating, isn’t it? “Do something that will make me not vote for you… but at least I’ll really like you!” I think overall politicians would like to get votes rather than sympathy, much like Bill Gates doesn’t care how much you hate him as long as you buy his software.
Maybe this ubiquitous blandness is precisely because nobody actually votes for people with outspoken strong convictions, no matter how much they might profess to respect them. America is still stable and wealthy, so who would want to vote for someone who might rock the boat?
I think it works long-term to be outspoken in issues. Then you can for short periods of time not ruffle any feathers while people remember that you stand up for what you believe in and then vote for you because of that.
To have a policy of not ruffling any feathers doesn’t work in the long run, I think.
That’s rather self-defeating, isn’t it? “Do something that will make me not vote for you… but at least I’ll really like you!” I think overall politicians would like to get votes rather than sympathy, much like Bill Gates doesn’t care how much you hate him as long as you buy his software.
Maybe this ubiquitous blandness is precisely because nobody actually votes for people with outspoken strong convictions, no matter how much they might profess to respect them. America is still stable and wealthy, so who would want to vote for someone who might rock the boat?[/quote]
Sorry. I was not clear as to why I would not vote for those two specific guys. They are Republicans and many of their party’s beliefs do not run parallel to mine. I meant to say that I wish some Democrats would take the lead and be outspoken on some issues in the same fashion so I could possibly vote for them. At this point, the few Democrats that have tried to in local politics have done so as a gimmick to get elected and then did nothing once they were in office.
If John McCain had run against the two fuck-ups that we had in the last gubernatorial election in Alabama, I would have elected him governor in a second. Same with the Senate seats here in the state.
A lot of Democrats I know would love the chance to vote for McCain. Yeah, he’s conservative, but he strikes people as having an open mind about things. You get a reputation for honesty and “straight talk” and people start to believe all kinds of things about you - with or without evidence.
I’m a huge McCain fan, myself. He has this righteous indignation that burns in his belly that doesn’t come off as contempt. And he really believes everything he says. Corporate money is ruining democracy. The country can’t afford more tax cuts. America shouldn’t be afraid to flex its muscles overseas. We are a country of values - not just interests. In a less cynical time there’d be folk tales about him.
You would be amazed how many politicians in the states get elected and then practice just that. Stay quiet, under the radar, build a fat political money chest, and spend 95% of your time in office insuring that you get re-elected. Our Senators and representatives do not have term limits as out president does and there in not a chance in holy hell that they will ever pass a law that enacts term limits. They are not citizens who run for office to help their fellow Americans make the country better, they are career politicians that can get rich and powerful by simply staying the course.
Exactly, what I like about McCain. Democrats do not get pissed and want to suggest fixes any longer. They bitch, moan and whine about how the Republicans want to rape your women and eat your babies. It is like they cannot think of any possible solution to the problems of our country and by demonizing the other side, they will get into power and figure it all out later.
WHether it is true or just an act for his show’s entertainment value (probably equal parts of each) I feel the same way about conservative talkshow host Bill O’Reilly. I had always thought he was a run-of the-mill right wing talking head. Once his radio show debuted where he is a bit more natural and laid back, he gets pissed about a lot of the same inequities and nonsense in our government that I do. Some of his societal views are nutty, but I find myself agreeing with him more than I could have imagined 10 years ago. Maybe even 5.
I can’t share your appreciation for O’Reilly, Ty. Maybe he really is an intelligent guy with interesting things to say. To me he’ll never be more than his TV act - a loudmouthed bully who attacks his guests when they disagree with him, facts and nuance be damned. As I age, I find have less patience with people who yell, unless they are at a ball game or something.
On McCain, I think that most of it is his honest self. He got burned in the S&L thing early in his Senate career and has been working to atone for that error and fix whatever put him in that place. But he has also become ubiquitous. He is so reliable for soundbites that he risks overexposure. The more he’s out there, the fewer risks he seems to take. Despite his principled opposition to the tax cut, all his Sunday morning appearances seemed to be focused on Iraq, where he backs the administration firmly.
I just reserved a copy from the library even though they are still on order. I’m looking forward to reading it.
At the last primary when they asked me to declare a party I told the dude Federalist. He looked at me like I was strange. :)
As far as Democrats go, I was kinda of hoping they still stood for civil liberties but I don’t know anymore. I like Rebuplicans in the White House and liberals on the Supreme Court.
