September 01, 2004

Is It Over Yet?

Is it just me, or is there a lot more "entertainment" at the RNC than substantive speeches? What's with all the bullshit musical acts? Trying to fill up the space I guess. Obviously, they're desperate if they would let Jenna and Barbara speak!

The most effective speaker that I've seen so far was Michael Steele. He was also the scariest in his rigid conservatism! His whole message was "Republicans don't believe in helping anyone. You help your damn self!"

It really reminded me of this post at Cul's awhile back, a partial analysis of the essence of each political party's belief systems. I thought it was an excellent article at the time that I read it and I felt that Michael Steele's speech really confirmed the truth in that analysis. He seemed to be the most straightforward and honest person when it came down to just coming out and saying what it is. Not trying to be a sheep in wolf's clothing like so many of these politicians.

Case in point: I saw Rudy G. being interviewed last night on CNN and he was asked something like "What advice would you give to President Bush to win over those voters who don't really like him?" Giuliani responded with: "I mean, every time I ran, I had to win over voters who largely didn't agree with me, since I was running in a city that was five to one Democratic. So I tried very hard to appeal to them on not being a Republican, you know, being a mayor..." In other words, "I just put on sheep's clothing and no one could even tell I was a wolf!"

So I have to hand it to Michael Steele for having the integrity to not sugar coat his beliefs. They're what they are. I strongly disagree, but I admire his honesty.

I read transcripts of some of the other speeches. I missed Schwarznegger and Laura because I was too busy focusing in on the chaos and mayhem that was occurring on our city streets last night, but the internet saves the day again. All the transcripts and audio are available at the RNC website. Laura Bush reminds me of my grandmother. It's weird. Arnold is a big palooka. No big surprises in their speeches. Personally, I find the RNC far more boring and laborious than the DNC. I'm sure it has nothing to do with my bias. ;o)

Tonight should be interesting. Another full lineup of musical guests. All of which I could live without except for Brooks and Dunn!!! I love Brooks and Dunn. Well, okay, I love that song "My Maria." Other than that, they're just another republican country music sensation. Hahaa. I'm pretty interested to see what the Cheneys have to say or if Dick can repress that hideous smirk for long enough to seem sincere.

Excerpt from Cul's 7/26/04 post quoting George Lakoff:

The Strict Father Family

In this view, the world is a dangerous and difficult place, there is tangible evil in the world and children have to be made good. To stand up to evil, one must be morally strong -- disciplined.

The father's job is to protect and support the family. His moral duty is to teach his children right from wrong. Physical discipline in childhood will develop the internal discipline adults need to be moral people and to succeed. The child's duty is to obey. Punishment is required to balance the moral books. If you do wrong, there must be a consequence.

The strict father, as moral authority, is responsible for controlling the women of the family, especially in matters of sexuality and reproduction.

Children are to become self-reliant through discipline and the pursuit of self-interest. Pursuit of self-interest is moral: If everybody pursues his own self-interest, the self-interest of all will be maximized.

Without competition, people would not have to develop discipline and so would not become moral beings. Worldly success is an indicator of sufficient moral strength; lack of success suggests lack of sufficient discipline. Those who are not successful should not be coddled; they should be forced to acquire self-discipline.

When this view is translated into politics, the government becomes the strict father whose job for the country is to support (maximize overall wealth) and protect (maximize military and political strength). The citizens are children of two kinds: the mature, disciplined, self-reliant ones who should not be meddled with and the whining, undisciplined, dependent ones who should never be coddled.

This means (among other things) favoring those who control corporate wealth and power (those seen as the best people) over those who are victims (those seen as morally weak). It means removing government regulations, which get in the way of those who are disciplined. Nature is seen as a resource to be exploited. One-way communication translates into government secrecy. The highest moral value is to preserve and extend the domain of strict morality itself, which translates into bringing the values of strict father morality into every aspect of life, both public and private, domestic and foreign.

America is seen as more moral than other nations and hence more deserving of power; it has earned the right to be hegemonic and must never yield its sovereignty or its overwhelming military and economic power. The role of government, then, is to protect the country and its interests, to promote maximally unimpeded economic activity, and maintain order and discipline.

From this perspective, conservative policies cohere and make sense as instances of strict father morality. Social programs give people things they haven't earned, promoting dependency and lack of discipline, and are therefore immoral. The good people -- those who have become self-reliant through discipline and pursuit of self-interest -- deserve their wealth as a reward. Rewarding people who are doing the right thing is moral. Taxing them is punishment, an affliction, and is therefore immoral. Girls who get pregnant through illicit sex must face the consequences of their actions and bear the child. They become responsible for the child, and social programs for pre- and postnatal care just make them dependent. Guns are how the strict father protects his family from the dangers in the world. Environmental regulations get in the way of the good people, the disciplined ones pursuing their own self-interest. Nature, being lower on the moral hierarchy, is there to serve man as a resource. The Endangered Species Act gets in the way of people fulfilling their interests and is therefore immoral; people making money are more important than owls surviving as a species. And just as a strict father would never give up his authority, so a strong moral nation such as the United States should never give up its sovereignty to lesser authorities. It's a neatly tied-up package.

Conservative think tanks have done their job, working out such details and articulating them effectively. Many liberals are still largely unaware of their own moral system. Yet progressives have one.

The Nurturant Parent Family

It is assumed that the world should be a nurturant place. The job of parents is to nurture their children and raise their children to be nurturers. To be a nurturer you have to be empathic and responsible (for yourself and others). Empathy and responsibility have many implications: Responsibility implies protection, competence, education, hard work and social connectedness; empathy requires freedom, fairness and honesty, two-way communication, a fulfilled life (unhappy, unfulfilled people are less likely to want others to be happy) and restitution rather than retribution to balance the moral books. Social responsibility requires cooperation and community building over competition. In the place of specific strict rules, there is a general "ethics of care" that says, "Help, don't harm." To be of good character is to be empathic and responsible, in all of the above ways. Empathy and responsibility are the central values, implying other values: freedom, protection, fairness, cooperation, open communication, competence, happiness, mutual respect and restitution as opposed to retribution.

In this view, the job of government is to care for, serve and protect the population (especially those who are helpless), to guarantee democracy (the equal sharing of political power), to promote the well-being of all and to ensure fairness for all. The economy should be a means to these moral ends. There should be openness in government. Nature is seen as a source of nurture to be respected and preserved. Empathy and responsibility are to be promoted in every area of life, public and private. Art and education are parts of self-fulfillment and therefore moral necessities.

Progressive policies grow from progressive morality. Unfortunately, much of Democratic policy making has been issue by issue and program oriented, and thus doesn't show an overall picture with a moral vision. But, intuitively, progressive policy making is organized into five implicit categories that define both a progressive culture and a progressive form of government, and encompass all progressive policies. Those categories are:

Safety. Post-September 11, it includes secure harbors, industrial facilities and cities. It also includes safe neighborhoods (community policing) and schools (gun control); safe water, air and food (a poison-free environment); safety on the job; and products safe to use. Safety implies health -- health care for all, pre- and post-natal care for children, a focus on wellness and preventive care, and care for the elderly (Medicare, Social Security and so on).

Freedom. Civil liberties must be both protected and extended. The individual issues include gay rights, affirmative action, women's rights and so on, but the moral issue is freedom. That includes freedom of motherhood -- the freedom of a woman to decide whether, when and with whom. It excludes state control of pregnancy. For there to be freedom, the media must be open to all. The airwaves must be kept public, and media monopolies (Murdoch, Clear Channel) broken up.

A Moral Economy. Prosperity is for everybody. Government makes investments, and those investments should reflect the overall public good. Corporate reform is necessary for a more ethical business environment. That means honest bookkeeping (e.g., no free environmental dumping), no poisoning of people and the environment and no exploitation of labor (living wages, safe workplaces, no intimidation). Corporations are chartered by and accountable to the public. Instead of maximizing only shareholder profits, corporations should be chartered to maximize stakeholder well-being, where shareholders, employees, communities and the environment are all recognized and represented on corporate boards.

The bottom quarter of our workforce does absolutely essential work for the economy (caring for children, cleaning houses, producing agriculture, cooking, day laboring and so on). Its members have earned the right to living wages and health care. But the economy is so structured that they cannot be fairly compensated all the time by those who pay their salaries. The economy as a whole should decently compensate those who hold it up. Bill Clinton captured this idea when he declared that people who work hard and play by the rules shouldn't be poor. That validated an ethic of work, but also of community and nurturance.

Global Cooperation. The United States should function as a good world citizen, maximizing cooperation with other governments, not just seeking to maximize its wealth and military power. That means recognizing the same moral values internationally as domestically. An ethical foreign policy means the inclusion of issues previously left out: women's rights and education, children's rights, labor issues, poverty and hunger, the global environment and global health. Many of these concerns are now addressed through global civil society -- international organizations dedicated to peacekeeping and nation building. As the Iraq debacle shows, this worldview is not naive; it is a more effective brand of realism.

The Future. Progressive values center on our children's future -- their education, their health, their prosperity, the environment they will inherit and The issues include everything from education (teacher salaries, class size, divethe global situation they will find themselves in. That is the moral perspective. rsity) to the federal deficit (will they be burdened with our debt?) to global warming and the extinction of species (will there still be elephants and bananas?) to health (will their bodies be poisoned as a result of our policies, and will there be health care for them?). Securing that future is central to our values.

These are the central themes of a progressive politics that comes out of progressive values. That is an important point. A progressive vision must cut across the usual program and interest-group categories. What we need are strategic initiatives that change many things at once. For example, the New Apollo Program -- an investment of hundreds of billions over 10 years in alternative energy development (solar, wind, biomass, hydrogen) is also a jobs program, a foreign-policy issue (freedom from dependence on Middle East oil), a health issue (clean air and water, many fewer poisons in our bodies) and an ecology issue (cleans up pollution, addresses global warming). Corporate reform is another such strategic initiative.

To read the rest of this great article, visit this page.

Posted by Maria at September 1, 2004 01:05 PM
Comments

wow, that was a good read. unfortunately, the righjt equates the progressive idea to communism. Anytime anyone mentions the "sharing" of anything, they say it is communism. Biy on heterophobic.org says that a universal healthcare system that covers all is communism.

Posted by: nunya at September 1, 2004 06:51 PM

great post maria...and thanx for the link to the traqnscripts...I missed all of tonight because of dwelling on the impending hurricane doom.

universal healthcare is socialist to be sure, but hardly communist. americans really do have to get over their ridiculous infatuation with seeing anything that remotely hints at socialism as some sort of demon out to steal their soul and gobble their precious children.

i'm especially tired of the whole comparison of democracy vs communism...comparing a political system to an economic one makes no sense at all.

by the way, this RNC is exactly as boring, contrived and duplicitous as most Republicans whose central experiential currency has always been a sort of fearful defense of the usual.

Posted by: cul at September 1, 2004 11:46 PM

couldn't agree more cul. the problem is, convincing folks like the righties who visit this blog. luckily, they are so far to the right, their numbers dwindle such that they are a vast majority.

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 12:39 AM

"their numbers dwindle such that they are a vast majority."

Huh? That kvm switch acting up again?

Posted by: Geoffrey at September 2, 2004 10:59 AM

oh the mistakes at 12:40am you can make and the things one can write....

so whats your excuse geoff, or does it come naturally to you to be a mean, nasty, evil racist chauvisitic pig all of the time?

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 12:04 PM

the GOP - where no mistake are made nor allowed - ever.

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 12:05 PM

How about this one Maria - in an article on yahoo, it quoted parts of Cheney's speech last night in whihc cheney said about bush being "a decisive leader who does agonize over decisions" but yet in another usa today artilce Bush himself said he agonized over the decision to go to war....

Here is the direct quote fro the yahoo article "Vice President Dick Cheney portrayed his boss as a decisive commander in chief. "He doesn't waffle, he doesn't agonize," Cheney said Thursday." http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20040902/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_convention_rdp

and here is the quaote from the usatoday article "Bush's demeanor was relaxed and confident. But he said he has agonized over his decision." http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-02-27-bush-lede-usat_x.htm

I hope the media doent let this one slip. Looks like if the flip flop fits....

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 01:15 PM

"whihc cheney said about bush being "a decisive leader who does agonize over decisions""

"but yet in another usa today artilce Bush himself said he agonized over the decision to go to war...."

They're saying the same thing. Christ you're stupid Nunya. Oh yeah, email me for tips on how to make a hyperlink.


Posted by: Gordon the Magnificent at September 2, 2004 05:32 PM

read the articles, they are NOT syaing the same thing. Cheney said bush does NOT agonize over making desicisions and in the other one bush said he DID agonize over making the decisions.
For crying out loud Gordon, look up, the sky is blue dude, no matter what you color you may think it is, that won't change the fact that it is still blue. Sorry dude, there is no way to dispute the facts on this one.
You always whine you want facts and not opinion. will, this is one case where it is raw fact, right from their very mouths, and you don't even beleive that.

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 08:00 PM

"read the articles, they are NOT syaing the same thing"

Well you wrote the same thing you fucking idiot child. Can you read NeoCUNT? Lets rehash what you wrote OK?

"whihc cheney said about bush being "a decisive leader who does agonize over decisions""

"but yet in another usa today artilce Bush himself said he agonized over the decision to go to war...."

In both quotes you are saying Bush agonized over going to war. Can you get anything right nunya?

Posted by: at September 2, 2004 08:15 PM

oh sorry, I "miscalculated" my writing.

Posted by: nunya at September 2, 2004 11:05 PM

Christ sakes man, what does miscalculating have to do with anything?

Posted by: Gordon the Magnificent at September 2, 2004 11:31 PM

the RNC was nothing but an "infomercial". **yawn**

Only thing worthy of note was the decided LACK of ethnic diversity in the crowd. Very telling.

Posted by: Richard at September 3, 2004 10:42 AM