Mickey Z
Cool Observer
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Photo caption contest, Kristen loves my book, Bangladesh bombs, acronym issues, & Bruce on guard
Caption:
“If you tell two friends about Faberge Organics shampoo with wheat germ oil and honey, they’ll tell two friends, and so on..and so on...and so on...”
[Obviously this was before the onset of veganism.]
Posted by Lee Hall on from 08/20 at 02:57 PMHi Mickey and All You Usual Suspects - wherever you are.
I’m unable to think of even one caption for the M.M. pic, which won’t make me feel guilty and embarrassed almost the moment I post it. I’ll have to think about it without looking again at the pic…Our Mr. Cockburn says, this morning, that the liberal-Democratic “left,” will probably keep many “mainstream” people from supporting Cindy Sheehan’s “Out of Iraq Now” position on the war. The big-name Dems are calling for an addition of as many as 90,000 new troops. Even Russ Feingold, the only Senator who can also claim to be a human being, has offered a 16-month “withdrawl” schedule. Therefore, Democratic-Party-Oriented groups like Move-On and Win Without War, are laying back, afraid of moving too far to the left of their beloved “leaders.”
I’m sometimes persuaded that the Democratic Party is a greater danger to the general population than the Republican party. The Republicans are so obviously psychotic and dripping with fascism, that even a significant group of conservatives and Christians has turned against them. But the Democrats still have great herds of faithful, hoofing along behind them amid great clouds of dust, wide-eyed and ever hopeful, waiting to be told what what to think, what to do…
It seems to me that a familiarity with American history would have to lead one to the conclusion that government itself is our greatest problem. Both parties blindfolded the general population and led them to that point in history where the Supreme Court could appoint Bush President and get away with it. Both parties re-elected BoyGeorge in 2004. Yet, millions of of supposedly thoughtful citizens wait impatiently for the “Opposition Party” to save them from this Republican nightmare. Well, as I see it, this is a two-party nightmare, and it’s time for all of us to “leave the gathering,” get some fresh air, and wake up…
Don’t know anything about the Bangladesh situation. I’ll peek into it today. When I was in India, however, people spoke about Bangladesh as being a “much more impoverished” place… That said alot…
Anyone else around, today?
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/20 at 02:57 PMGreat post, Lee.
Every thought that came into my head was disparaging, in one way or another. But you knew right where to look - into our rich, multi-layered commercial history. I remember that commercial, clearly. Imagine how many of those we have tucked away in our little heads, complete with words, music, actions, facial-expressions…
Amazing.Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/20 at 04:00 PMI’ve seen that idea gaining some currency, or rather noticed it: that the Democrats are the more destructive group because they appear sane in comparison. A lot of the liberals I know stick with them because the influential Democrats are arguably saner than the Republicans. It’s a sad bargain. It reduces the role of the people to arguing over which elite group is less likely to prey on them.
I’ve had a small amount of luck arguing that the better role for an interested and civic-minded citizen is to take a more adversarial approach to party politics. When you can be taken for granted, you will be. It should be obvious that hierarchical, formal, representational systems are not and cannot be loyal to individuals or even, in many cases, the constitutiencies that give them legitimacy.
Posted by Harry on from 08/20 at 09:09 PMI love it, Lee. I wasn’t focusing on the hair either.
As for Cindy and the Dems, I was preparing a post I was hoping to make from down here. It begins:
Why aren’t high-profile Democrats like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry rushing down to Crawford for a photo op with Cindy? Could it be the fact that they and their party fully support this war?
I’ll try to follow through with it on Monday.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Texas 08/20 at 09:44 PMHi Harry -
What an incisive sentence: “It reduces the role of the people to arguing over which elite group is less likely to prey on them.” If just the information contained in this one sentence could become common knowledge, the whole house of cards would collapse.I very much agree, the system as presently structured can not be loyal to the needs of ordinary people. I’ve tried to approach discussions in much the same way: Take an additional step backward, as it were, and look at the system as a whole. See for yourself that it simply can not be re-tooled to “function correctly,” because it is already doing exactly what it was deliberately designed to do - to serve capital and power.
It should be obvious that the more control each ordinary person has over his or her life, the more sane and healthy and reasonable life will become - for individuals, for communities and for vast accumulations of people. This is the opposite of the heirarchy we’ve enshrined here in the Land of the Free.
In a land in which ordinary people control their own lives, there would be no need for millions of people to behave as a herd, waiting for direction from above. “Above” itself, would vanish…
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/20 at 10:05 PMPS - Hey, Mickey. Good to see ya’ all!
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/20 at 10:09 PMHi Mickey! Good to hear from you. Joe, this next bit is directed at what Mickey just said and our ongoing dialogue.
I think the high profilers are concerned about a populist movment that they’d have to follow. In the end, it’s better for them to lose a couple of elections than it is to actually respond. They want obedience. Hence this social engineering they play: encourage nominal resistance, demotivate the base with treacherous moves, cultivate apathy and disappointment, and preserve as much power as they can. It’s a real corporate sensibility, the kind you see when a company is more concerned with protecting market share through manipulations than through snazzy products.
Posted by Harry on from 08/20 at 10:17 PMI think that’s dead on, Harry. They want us to consistently feel that we are powerless and entirely unimportant. They have the most control when we feel insignificant: We MUST turn to them! What else could we possibly do?
I’ve been rereading some Zinn, in which he talks about how, when early American colonists were captured by or were forced to run to the Native Americans, they NEVER wanted to return to our “white world.” They had found something which worked infinitely better, and with very, very little compulsion. Hence, our “society” exterminated their society. We did the same to the Black Panther Party which set up free transportation services for the elderly, breakfast programs for little kids and a wide variety of community support programs. They showed that common people could take care of themselves.
Absolutely unacceptable.
As Chomsky says so frequently: They’re terrified that anyone might have the opportunity to offer a “good example,” of what we’re capable of doing - On Our Own…Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/20 at 11:34 PMThis is going off on a tangent, but a few years ago I came to suspect the real threat of the civil rights movment was economic. One of the blogs Mickey has linked lays out the bus boycott initiated by Rosa Parks:
Rosa lived a childhood of hearing the Ku Klux Klan ride at night, listening to lynchings, and being afraid the house would burn down around them. She was arrested, tried, and convicted for violating segregation law, which sparked the 381 day bus boycott. She had had prior run-ins with bus drivers and was evicted from buses. She was active in the NAACP and the Mother of the Civil Rights Movement. The resulting boycott’s length shocked everyone, well everyone white. Black supporters had been busy city wide arranging long-term taxi services, church buses, car pooling, etc. so the boycott could continue as long as it would take. Rosa was an experienced activist with strong beliefs and backing. When she refused to surrender her seat she knew clearly what the goal was with that refusal. She stood against centuries of humiliation, violence, and injustice.
I wonder if the civil rights legislation eventually passed under the Commerce Clause was done so with any sense of irony. For a fact, bigotry is very bad for business. It’s even worse for high ridin’ freeloader businesses when people find a way to manage on their own. Now that sense of how hamrful bigotry can be to big financial interests is either forgotten—likely—or the top dogs think they’ve got anough salted away offshore to ride out any harm they do to the country’s economy.
Posted by Harry on from 08/21 at 12:29 AMHi Harry -
Well, this is a grand can of worms you’ve opened here. I must admit, I’m confused by the economics of what’s taking place, of late. Obviously the Bush Administration is bankrupting the country. A relatively small number of American corporations are the beneficiaries of this looting of the treasury. What about all the other corporations? It seems as though enormous numbers of businesses are dependant upon there being a fairly substantial “middle-class,” yet, the Elites seem to be deliberately destroying it.The general “buzz” about globalization is that “they” are out to turn the populations of “the West” into third-world societies. Corporations, then, would have the entire population of the world to work with, when they need cheap employees. However, with everyone poor, who will buy the products? What happens to the corporations which cater to people with a fair amount of disposable income - auto manufacturers, home builders, appliance producers, pharmaceutical corporations, medical equipment companies, television, films, etc., etc., - the list would be almost endless…
Most of the major corporations are now international in character, hence not dependant upon the US population alone. Yet, if all populations are knocked to their knees, what happens?
I don’t get any of this, Harry. What’s your take on it all?Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 01:12 AMA sane and secure financial elite ensures the labor/consumer class can do things that will fatten the financial big shots’ bank balances. The ideal is for most to be what we think of as middle class. That is, to theoretically be able to own a home almost anywhere and to make major purchases from time to time. The problem with that, however, is quite a few of them are going to send their kids to college and have aspirations for them to climb the social ladder. Some of the kids are going to use the entree into the elite to exercise their social consciences somewhat. They become reformers, activisits, social democrats or even further left. This is significant step away from a paternalist oligarchy. Small reform from a political class that has some disposable income is a bigger threat to oligarchs than uncredentialed auto-didacts. I think the oligarchs in both parties want to put a significant economic hit on the middle classes. Keep them burdened with debt, dependent on employment for healthcare and too scared to make waves.
The middle classes support things like the ACLU. Civil liberties mean a lot to people who may lose a significant amount of what they’ve worked to obtain. Civil liberties than can be enforced within the system of governance obstruct oligarchs, most of who wish to rule by decree. Outright rebellions by the poor are easy to crush. No one cares much about them.
So it may seem worthwhile to our oligarchs to take some financial losses now in order to ensure greater power. After a certain point, gaining money is all about power and has little to do with basic security.
Posted by Harry on from 08/21 at 01:45 AMThat’s an astute theory, Harry. And, of course, you’re right, most of those folks don’t need any more money: It’s about power, pure and simple. There are a great many things that money can’t buy but which power can simply - take.
I recall reading that, one of the ways the Soviets were able to mantain such tight control over their populations for such a long time was by essentially eliminating the middle-class very early on. After that, control was relatively simple. Still, simultaneously, they eliminated poverty as it exists in the West. Food, shelter and medical care, albeit poor food, inadequate shelter and rudimantary medical care - were considered to be the right of all. The Elites are doing an interesting balancing act - and a dangerous one for themselves, as well as for us. If they go too far, enormous numbers of “injured” people may react unpredictably. Unfortunately, it may be little more than a short, violent spasm before they lay down and turn belly up, like a whipped dog in the sand…
We’re in quite a bit of trouble, methinks, Harry.Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 02:22 AMTry as I did, it appears to me that it’s a lot harder to come up with a caption for a picture if there is no act or action in it. Other than looking at a camera, that is. Too bad. I wanted a free copy of the book too.
Posted by Wise Fool on from 08/21 at 02:37 AMWe sure are, Joe, but there are a couple of things to add to that for perspective. Oligarchs have no easier a time coming to consensus than the rest of us. The politicians and their sponsors are treacherous. Much of what they do is self-defeating or done to spite each other. The bastshit crazy reactionary tendency has to work overtime to stay on top of the sane evil tendency. It’s easy to look at what they do and despair, but it’s also good to keep in mind that most of them are not terribly smart. They get away with a lot because so many people cling to authoritarian cultures.
There are some events that are going to significantly alter the way they divide power amongst themselves. Global warming and peak oil are too much for the barking cretins in their ranks to handle. The Chimperor is destroying the military. I sometimes think he loathes anything that’s even vaguely merit-based. Cindy Sheehan and friends are making him and his snickering ninnies overreract. The Vichy Democrats may do more than just demotivate their supporters. There’s a chance they’ll lose some of them to the Greens (who very badly need to get their act together).
Posted by Harry on from 08/21 at 03:23 AM“Moore calls for restrictions on Flint locks.”
Posted by Owen on from Barcelona 08/21 at 05:00 AMJoe, when you asked ‘with everyone poor, who will buy the products?’ it got me thinking: for centuries we lived under physical occupation and that changed relatively recently to what we have now, financial occupation where we allowed ourselves get fattened on mountains of goods we don’t need. What’s happening now in places like the Congo is corporations like Barrick gold (senior ‘adviser’: Bush.01) and AngloAmerican Co (the family Oppenheimer) are hustling at an increased pace for gold, zinc, copper, cobalt and other materials precious or strategic to the purpose of getting out of paper wealth and into tangible commodities for use during a change back to the physical, a food/rawmaterials dictatorship - no shortage of people to buy goods when they’re things one needs. I consider the most impoverished parts of the planet to be the pertidishes for globalisation.
Posted by Owen on from Barcelona 08/21 at 12:57 PMoops for perti read petri
Posted by Owen on from Barcelona 08/21 at 12:59 PMGood thoughts, Harry. Good overview.
Generally they’re well-organized, and obviously consistently engage in planning for various contingencies. It’s good that you remind us that they have rifts and conflicts within their ranks. Moreover, history tells us that they are afraid of us - very much afraid of us, and have been since way back when the colonies were still in rudimentary form. This intense fear has compelled them to relentlessly discover new methods of dividing us into various opposing groupings and to place themselves into the equation as the only hope of solution.These times are filled with dangers and great opportunities for them and for us. As Owen points out ( Hi Owen, & thanks for your input! ) they’re experimenting in impoverished, relatively weak and unstable societies, to discover how best to proceed with us. But, they’re confronting situations - as you mention, global warming and peak oil - (and this amazing internet!) which take us all into completely unknown territory. Their greed ( always astonishing), their arrogance ( hubris, really) and their fear of “us” may well cause them to make serious mistakes. In fact, I think the Project for the New American Century is a big mistake… Nothing riles up the peasantry as much as war, and they’ve planned lots of war and lots of death… As horrible as it is, it may well work to our advantage, long term. There are lots more Cindy Sheehans on the horizon. And, impoverishing the masses may also work to our advantage, if the increased misery causes people to look around and wake up a bit more. Scraping about for basic needs can radicalize people in a hurry. As you and Owen both instruct us, that seems to be where we’re heading. The whole world has become a Petri Dish…
BTW, Harry, I think your observations about the Civil Rights Movement ring quite true.
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 04:21 PMJoe, I’m skeptical about poverty, hunger and sickness working towards any advantage but that of the ruling classes. People in miserable conditions have a hard time making rational decisions. From my own experience, it was respites from sorrow and want that allowed me to think clearly. People often perversely seek out more of what’s hurting them and/or blame their immediate circle. When misery is the prevailing condition, it takes real strength of character to avoid lashing out.
Posted by Harry on from 08/21 at 05:13 PMHi again, Harry -
I think that’s generally true. Yet, amid great changes, even very unpleasant ones, there’s an interesting disorientation that often occurs, opening up a variety of possibilities. In Russia, for example, WWI and its attendant miseries helped make possible the great Revolution. (Of course, Tzarist policies had primed the population already.) In Vietnam, the general anxiety and horror within the ranks caused many atrocities toward the civillian population. Gradually, however, many guys began to step back and see the war with new eyes. Lots of soldiers and even marines became pretty rebellious, though such things might have been unthinkable just a few months before. Their radicalism and discontent helped end the war, no doubt.
In the black community, there is generally a greater radicalism than can be found in white neighborhoods, which radicalism has arisen out of the knowledge that the system itself has failed them. They know that because there’s so much poverty and misery and blatant injustice. Even many “mainstream” blacks understand that the system is rigged, and that it would be better for all if it were eliminated. I have very little first hand experience in Latino-American communities, but, from what I’ve read, there’s great mistrust for the system there, as well - again, because living conditions are so frequently “unpleasant.”Of course, you’re right, there will be significant scapegoating, of immigrants, “terrorists,” leftists, environmentalists, etc., as the Elites and their media attempt to mis-direct negative emotions and attention from the actual culprits. However, while it will be increasingly dangerous to do so, those of us who have some inkling of what is actually going on, can help direct attention back to where it belongs. If “word of mouth” could build Starbucks into the largest coffee company in the world, perhaps people like us can help clear away some of the fog, so that sightings of the truth can become more frequent and more significant.
Keir said, recently, that we’ve embarked on a generations-long endeavor. Sadly, I guess he’s right. You and I may never see the positive changes we so passionately long for.
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 06:26 PMHey Mickey - hope all is going well for you & Michele and your mom. Drop us a line when you’ve time…
Apropos of our recent conversation about searches on the subway, this paragraph from the Socialist Worker:
“And on August 1, two New York City politicians--State Assemblyman Dov Hikind, a Democrat, and City Council member James Oddo, a Republican--called for ethnic and racial profiling of Arab and South Asian men in the subway searches. According to Hikind, potential terrorists “all look a certain way.”Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 07:11 PMLong time no see, been out on the frontline here (got some stories for you) but I’ve tuned in just in time to see this “magickal photo”. After enjoying a smoke I can only come up with “Barry Manilow tickets!! I love Barry Manilow!” But maybe I can appreciate it more after reading up.. Hope your trip to TX is blasty cool. Bring home any chilly souveniers? Can I get back on your list? charli (formerly ladyofgriffith of AR)
Posted by charli on from Ohio 08/21 at 10:17 PMOwen, I guess I mis-read your petri-dish post a bit. I apologize. You know, I sometimes visit a site called fromthewilderness.com, run by an ex-cop from L.A.. He sometimes posts articles about the fact that paper money will soon ( too soon, he says ) become essentially worthless, and that if one can buy, borrow or steal some precious metals, do so forthwith. I have another friend who hoards, and keeps refrigerated, various pain-killer medications. She is certain ( and, I’d have to agree ) that they will be excellent tender for all sorts of needs in the near future.
Charli - I don’t know you, but your post really tickled me. I’ll be chuckling off and on, all evening. Thanks.
Posted by joe on from Oregon 08/21 at 11:54 PMCaption:
As a young, hip hairstylist on the Flint, Michigan scene, Michael McMoore dreamt of bringing women’s hairstyles to men throughout the world...sadly, his dream ended with the close of the 1970’s.
He felt somewhat vindicated however, when his signature style (seen pictured here) resurfaced on the hit TV show friends, renamed “The Rachel.”
Posted by James on from Puerto Rico 08/22 at 09:22 AMHello all,
I wish I could comment at length and join this excellent discussion… but you know how it is with public computers. I will, however, try to make a new blog post shortly because the next two days will be all about my Mom.
Nice to see you again, Charli. I’ll add you to my list when I get back to NYC.
No more captions?
From Bush Country,
MZ
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Dubya Land 08/22 at 11:48 AMMine is #16, I forgot to mention.
Thanks for the address Joe, I’d read a few things by Ruppert and found him fascinating but had never looked at his website. This week I saw a documentary with him in it on a DVD called Confronting the Evidence about a ‘town hall meeting’ (as the hosts put it) held on Sep 11 2004 in NYC with journalists, physicists, environmentalists and one pretty interesting senator all holding up the official 911 story and peeping through the holes. You can get the DVD posted to you for free at http://reopen911.org/ , I think it’s required viewing in these odd times.
Rather than pick precious metals to save I prefer the idea of ones with practical uses like copper (a currency with more than metaphysical importance is always welcome with me)- besides, as soon as the shine wears off paper wealth for a population and they start eyeing precious metals the gubbermint simply outlaw the possession of them: in the country I was born in (Ireland) it’s been illegal to buy gold and silver for about ten years and the largest gold robbery in history was when it was made illegal to own it in the US in 1933 - the paper/shiny-stuff cycle racket is a grand ol tradition it would seem.
Posted by Owen on from Barcelona 08/22 at 06:54 PMHi Owen - I’m sorry, I guess I stumbled off to bed and missed this post.
September 11 really re-radicalized me. I’d been immersed in raising three kids and trying to remain vaguely sane and compassionate, and most politics ( and almost everything else ) just slipped out of my visual field for a while. Then, sometime after the attacks, I began to read and study the events of that day. After literally hundreds of hours of reading and studying and pondering I realized that I had no idea what actually happened, but that the “official tale” was absolutely preposterous.
Once one concludes that the official story is false, the possibilities become very many, indeed, and all of them are horrific.
I’ll check out that site, Owen, thanks much.I have no money to buy precious metals, anyway, but it’s interesting to learn that it was once illegal to own gold. ( I didn’t know, or don’t remember knowing! ) It would certainly be almost impossible to preclude people from owning copper, however. Every new house must have a hundred pounds of copper, or more, inside the walls and beneath the floors.
It continues to amaze me how consistently they scam and abuse us. They take our torpor and ignorance and blind trust for granted and screw us when we wake up, screw us all day, and screw us when we go to bed. No wonder it’s painful just to sit down - and here I thought it was just old age pains…
And owning gold is still illegal in Ireland, eh?
Fascinating. What sort of rationale do they offer for such legislation?
And, BTW, how do you happen to be in Spain, rather than in Ireland, Owen? Are you a “dedicated” expatriot? Do you go back to visit?
I’m mostly Irish, and I’ve often thought of visiting, but I’ve read that one may not smoke a cigarette in any public buildings anywhere in the entire country. I had always imagined I’d sit down in some splendid little pub somewhere and swallow a pint or two of Guiness and smoke a few cigarettes and look around at people who look like my grandfathers, and my father and myself…
But, now, well, when I can afford to wander, maybe I’ll wander to Puerto Rico or to Spain…Thanks for this post, Owen, and - again - I apologize for missing it. Talk to you again soon, I’m sure. G`night.
- joePosted by joe on from Oregon 08/24 at 03:53 AMI gave “50 American Revolutions...” a bit of a plug on my blog: http://demiorator.blogspot.com/2005/09/50-american-revolutions-youre-not.html. I like it. I just realized I completely neglected to mention how informed the whole tone is by progressive political thought. Guess I thought it was self evident from the title. Oh, well…
Posted by wordlackey on from New England 09/01 at 05:14 PMThanks, wordlackey. I appreciate all the good word-of-mouth I can get. Where did you get the book so soon?
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 09/01 at 09:45 PMMickey: I hang my head in shame because I got it at Barnes and Noble, the bookstore of Hell. And we have an excellent progressive/left bookstore in Amherst, Mass called “Food for Thought” where I shop regularly. But I admit I like going to B&N to browse their bargain bin books. I’ve picked up some excellent books cheap in that way. Um, not that your book was in the bargain bin; I paid full price. I think I bought it about 5-7 days ago.
I’ve also been eying “The Murdering of My Years” for a couple of years because of the subject and the very catchy title but I haven’t bought it yet. If I do, I’ll probably go to Food for Thought in an attempt to balance out my horrible B&N karma.
Posted by wordlackey on from New England 09/02 at 12:30 AMI’ve given a talk at Food for Thought. Great place.
If you want a copy of “Murdering” (signed), send me $10 and I’ll mail you one.
MZ
Box 9103
Astoria, NY 11103Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 09/02 at 07:16 AM
Next entry: Questions inspired by Cindy Sheehan
Previous entry: The day I hypnotized the NYPD (plus: Mumia and Cindy)
Copyright © 2005-2007 Mickey Z.
