Voting - a Patriot's Job

patriot |ˈpātrēət|
noun
1. a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.

As a member of one of the United States' major political parties, I spend most of every election season on the phone or out doorbelling the neighbors. I don't do it because it's fun or because it changes peoples minds. Surprisingly, few people have their minds altered by what I say. What I'm really hoping for is to move people  to fill out and return their ballots. A small thing to ask, but an important show of Patriotism.

In my state this small act of patriotism seems to have lost importance to many of my friends and neighbors. Of the 150,069 voters in my home county, only 50,980 case ballots in the last election. Maybe the 66.9% who didn't vote aren't Patriots? Hard to believe when so many are so vocal about how patriotic they are. Perhaps some don't think their vote counts or that the people they elect can't make a difference. I would ask those who think that way "do they have an alternative to voting that advances our democratic principles?"- I didn't think so.

We can all agree that our country was founded on the principles of representative democracy. Since that's true isn't the Patriots duty to uphold those principles by electing the best representatives they can in each election? I know I'm sounding preachy, but what else can I do to help you get your vote in?

Lastly, let's think about what happens when we ignore our own democracy, the 33% who vote have power over the 66% who don't. Our founding fathers knew what would happen if we fail to exercise our voting rights and it isn't pretty:

 "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson
So as Mayor Daily used to say Get out there and "vote early and often".

Leadership and Climate Change Action

This is part of the eighty solid blocks of climate activists who the "Media" didn't see Sunday in New York City.

Over 675,000 of us marched around the world. It was a beautiful expression of our love for all that climate change threatens, and our hope that we can save this world and build a society powered by 100% safe, clean energy. Click to see more pictures from the day: 

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/climate_march_reportback/?bvnGtdb&v=46379 

How about corporate media? Didn't they just nail it yesterday? All those pictures, videos, stories about the six hundred thousand marchers for climate action - NOT! The only live coverage I say was on Democracy Now (http://www.democracynow.org). Where do you suppose CNN, NBC, Fox, etc. were for this world wide protest against government's failure to address Climate Change? My guess is they were asleep in the bosom to their corporate sponsors, many of whom have a vested interest in climate denial.

Of course, we aren't really expecting for profit corporations to be at the forefront in solving climate change or any other environmental problem. After all, they have had a large role in causing these problems. No, we think that the usual suspects (you and I) are going to have to do the heavy lifting if we want to solve the problem.

Join a group, write to your congressman, get high efficiency light bulbs, walk to work, talk to your friends and family and for christ's sake vote. It is only through the unrelenting pressure of public protest and the right actions of individuals that change will come.

Democracy - Who Needs It?

I go to a lot of meetings. Some are general membership meetings, some are smaller committees, but all are run democratically using the one person one vote rule. I find that many at these meeting don't agree with or even understand that in democracies the majority gets their way and the minority just has to try again later.

Instead of deciding to try again with better organizing or better candidates some resort to anger and intimidation. Don't get me wrong, I don't think strong emotion should be absent from politics, I'd just like the minority to remember that democracy is a decision making tool. That tool is there to keep decision making a civilized endeavor. Strong emotion may be needed to persuade people to vote your way, but it's never appropriate as a tool to punish those who voted against you.

There are a number of Americans who think we are headed for a dictatorship or descending into anarchy. I don't think so, but if we don't honor the act of voting by recognizing the duties of winners and losers, we could end up there. Elections and those we elect come and go, but if we ignore the process, we may find ourselves dictated to.

Election day in the State of Washington is Tuesday August 5th. Please get your ballot in - we all need your vote.

Guns Again, Dammit!

This headline from Chicago reminds us of just how foolish the American gun culture is.
82 shot - 14 Fatally The police blame criminals who haven't been properly punished. I blame Americans who fear other Americans and pundits and the gun sellers who feed on that fear.

Several of these killings were "officer involved" with witnesses suggesting that some of them were police violence with people shot for being black. True or not, it reinforces my contention that many Americans including Policemen perpetrate the gun culture out of fear.

We fear those who look different or who come from someplace else. There is very little basis for these fears since we are all members of the same family - Homo Sapiens. I don't care who you are, where you come from or what you look like, the kind of fear that causes eighty-two shootings in a single weekend has to be irrational. If I was a conspiracy theorist I might blame the propagandists on the right who are happy to have the poor at each others throats - or even the manufacturers of pistols and assault rifles who pretend that we need protecting from each other and only their products of mass destruction will save us from those who are different.

Let's just remember we are all members of the human family and that your fear is not a reason to kill your family.

Why People Vote (or not)

Some of you may know that this blogger is an activist in the Democratic Party and a believer in progressive causes. One way that a poor retired person like me helps the party is by "door belling"for candidates. It turns out that the best way to move people to vote and to act progressively is person to person and face to face.

Last weekend as I was out door belling I met several folks who told me that they didn't find a need to vote. I asked why, of course.

The answers were all some version of the 'I hate politics and politicians" line we've heard forever. My response, after picking up my dropped jaw, was various versions of "if you don't vote - you can't bitch" or "OK you just made my vote count for more". Of course, none of that actually changed anyone's mind or got more votes for my candidate. What it did do was get me thinking about why people vote - or don't.

Americans are pretty lousy voters for being so into democracy. In our state at the last off year election there were over five million (5,149,729) voting age persons. Three million plus (3,601,268) were registered voters. That leaves us wondering where the one and a half million unregistered but probably eligible voters are. Even more worrying is that those who were registered, only two point five million (2,565,589) actually voted. That my friends is only 49.82% of the voting age population of this state.

I'll bet that you, like me, would like to know why in a country that should believe in the "one person - one vote" and "majority rule" less than half of us even cast our ballots? Like me you know there are obstacles to voting for some. Foreign language speakers, the poor - especially the rural poor have problems, soldiers and others who are out of state may not get ballots in time, are problems for some.
Even so, a million and a half additional voters is enough of a difference to effect any state wide election. What really worries me is that there are a million and a half ideas and opinions that just aren't being heard because those are the ideas of those who don't or can't vote.

Let's find a way to at least get the number of voters above the fifty percent mark for this election cycle.

Do Gun Owners Vote?

We all know that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has a lot of clout with lawmakers. I'm just wondering why? Yes, there are almost four million members, but do they vote or are they really just one more big unregulated SuperPac?

Let us think about the logic here - four million is a lot of potential voters, if they all voted together that might be important. In reality, those members are spread across fifty states and numerous foreign countries. That, to my mind, makes their importance in the electoral process much smaller than many would suggest. What happens is that NRA members and the gun manufacturers who support the NRA lobby congress and propagandize the rest of us. If truth be told, quite a few of the actual NRA Membership falls into that demographic that  thinks congress is a bunch of do nothing slackers and don't vote regularly anyway.

In reality, the NRA is primarily the propaganda and marketing arm of the gun industry. A membership comes with magazines and web videos that aim to keep the member focused on "your right to own and use firearms. This group, that started as a laudable movement to keep the citizen militias that were the National Guard of the time trained, has become a tool of commerce. Since 1998 they have convinced 177 Million Americans to buy one or more guns. That's half the population of the United States. I would guess that that means the total number of guns out there pretty much equals or exceeds the population. If we got all those guns together that would be some firefight, wouldn't it?


Why then does congress listen to the NRA? Since it isn't about votes, it must be about something else. What does the National Rifle Association have that convinces congress to go along - it isn't the righteousness of 300 Million guns, I hope. If so we can expect further iterations of the UC Santa Barbara mass shootings. Even right wing congressmen don't want that. No, many of us believe that it's about money. The NRA Lobby does what all lobbies do - it throws money at congress in exchange for favors. They talk congress into seeing the world their way one dollar at a time.

Here is what one of the UC Santa Barbara parents think

"It's The End of The World as We Know It (And I don't feel fine)" With apologies to REM

Current Texas Drought

I'm thinking we should give a general heads up to stockholders of the worlds fossil fuel companies. It's possible they don't know that their money is being used to build the world's largest implement of mass destruction. I don't think we can call the giant greenhouse that fossil fuel has built anything else - it really is an implement of destruction that threatens us all.

The Fossil Fuel Industry denies culpability, of course. The have, like the Tobacco Industry before them, hired tame scientists to claim that they not only didn't cause the problem, but that the scientific community and the rest of us are wrong and there is no problem with the climate. My guess is that the management of these companies hopes to squeeze a few years of extra profit out before the real destruction hits home.

This is a pretty gutsy plan. If it works they will be able to pull out their profits and head for high ground before the shareholders and the general public notice that they have been left holding the bag. If they wait too long they, like the rest of us, will be up to their necks in rising seawater and degraded habitat. There will also be many that would like to "string the bastards up" or at least sue their pants off.

If it's not your neck the water's up to then what?

Don't you think that the shareholders should know about the giant mess the management of these companies is making? Fossil fuel companies have made billions in profit and have failed to look to the welfare of those shareholders. If I owned a share of Exxon or Shell, you can believe I'd be in their face yesterday. Managers and executives in major corporations are for the most part well educated and understand that they are on a path to destruction. What they haven't understood is that this is world wide destruction and they will have to leave the planet or share in "the end of the world as we know it" and no I don't feel fine.

I just received a post by Bill Moyers that agrees with our contention that climate change is an implement of mass destruction. Since Bill is a much better journalist you should read what he has to say:

The 95 Percent Doctrine: Climate Change as a Weapon of Mass Destruction

http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/23/the-95-doctrine-climate-change-as-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction/

Will The Oligarchs Win Again? ( AT&T to buy DirecTV)

In 1949 the Justice Department files an antitrust suit against AT&T (then the Bell system). That suit resulted in a consent decree. That decree limited the company to running the national network. 1974 brought another suit which, in 1984 caused the divestiture of the regional Bell companies. AT&T then bought computer maker NCR followed by McCaw Cellular and TCI Cable Co. By 1999 they were back in the local telephone business and in 2000 with the acquisition of MediaOne became the largest US Cable Company. Finally AT&T merges with SBC to become a premier communications company.

I'm telling you all this because AT&T wants to be bigger and better yet with the proposed acquisition of satellite tv company DirecTV, a move very similar to those earlier moves that caused the original breakup of the Bell System. I wonder if we still care whether one or two companies have control of the entire communication infrastructure? When I was young, we had compelling evidence that the giant corporations were out to make a buck no matter who it hurt. The US Government, as a method of protecting consumers, broke up large monopolies and forbade monopolistic mergers and acquisitions. Now days we let corporations buy each other no matter what it does for consumers. Heck, we even let them buy Senators and Congressmen by the bucket full.

Perhaps that's why current law allows these acquisitions? Generations of bought politicians have weakened the law and damped our resolve. Maybe we have lost our ability to give a dam?

Are You Taking Climate Change Personally?

Are you one of the many who wonder what it's all about. Maybe your congressman is one of the climate deniers or you have been hearing from from one of the three climate scientists that have yet to get the word about our changing climate.

First let me remind you that 97% of the science community is firmly convinced that the whole CO2-Methane-Particulates miasma that you and I put into the atmosphere is the cause of the temperature increases we have seen over the last 200 years and especially over the previous 50 years. Even the Federal Government has noticed the world is not as it was and has thinks we should do something about it.

National Climate Assessment Look at this report - it's an eye opener.

The photo below is my own neighborhood after a king tide and rain storm sent water over the road and into yards. Just a temporary blip, but one we will see repeated in many places over the next century as oceans rise with the temperature.

Please read the climate report National Climate Assessment and decide if you need to take it personally.

Oligarchy, What's it mean? An Earth Day rant.

Oligarchy is rule by the few, according to Webster's Dictionary. A number of folks think that's where the U.S. is headed, if it hasn't already become one. Plutocracy - rule by the (necessarily few) rich is more like it, I'd say. Earth Day, of course, is the day each year we celebrate the protection of the earth and it's environment. The question is what do the Oligarchs and Plutocrats have to do with Earth Day?

Not much I'd say. The primary focus of Plutocrats and Oligarchs is power and money. Any feeling for earths environment is usually centered on how it can be exploited. If you have seen the results of open pit mining:

   Barrick Goldstrike mine, Nevada --  Credit: Earthworks

or the devastation caused by Tar Sands extraction:

Alberta,Canada Tar Sands extraction site

there's not much more to say about Plutocracy and Environmentalism.

Democracy, on the other hand, is rule by the citizenry. Do you think the majority ruled in favor of this kind of reckless environmental exploitation? Well I don't either!

Can We Save The Earth? Some say no.

There are some in the environmental movement who think we have already lost the battle against Climate Change. We should admit defeat - that collapse is inevitable and we should prepare for a different and more limited world. I'm not sure about admitting defeat, but people like Paul Kingsnorth and The Dark Mountain Project may have something to teach us about the new world of deteriorating climate and the rampant disregard for a whole world's ecology.

Most of us know we need to reverse the flow of greenhouse gases. Some even know of good ways to accomplish this reversal. The question is, of course, why we have yet to make any significant start on making that reversal happen?

There are many technological things we know will have some effect. Renewable energy, mass transit, conservation are some that come to mind. Why aren't they all being pursued vigorously many ask? It's all about politics or economics or cultural differences most would say. Where Kingsnorth and others have something to say is the suggestion that human cultures just aren't up to the task of saving the whole world. I think they might be right about us not being up to the task. If you and I aren't ready to change things, how can we expect the rest of humanity not to slide towards extinction?

We have many excuses, of course. The science isn't complete or is just plain wrong is one I hear from those who haven't read or bothered to understand the proofs of climate change. I say, "read the reports - check it out for yourself". When you have knowledge you are half way to solving the problem. Big business profits from the status quo. Well yes it does, but only if you are willing to live with the status quo. The really big excuse is that the problem is just too large and complicated to be solved by you and me. OK that one is what moved Kingsnorth to start his Dark Mountain Project. He decided he couldn't attack the problem directly.

Moving the world culture is just too difficult and complicated so he decided on a project to change individuals instead. I agree with the basic precept here. We really do need to change people if we want to change the world.

 I'm not quit ready to give up the idea of us being able to reverse climate change; however. What you and I can do individually may be small, but just think about how much can be accomplished if all 7 billion humans each did a little. Worldwide collective action might not be possible yet, but each of us must take responsibility for doing what we can.

When warming causes oceans to rise, lawns are hard to mow.

Zombie Ideas

I've never been much interested in Zombies, The Walking Dead, etc; however, I came across the term "Zombie Idea" in recent Robert Reich and Paul Krugman opinion pieces.  Never heard the term before?  According to Krugman, Zombie Ideas are policy ideas that keep being killed by evidence, but nonetheless shamble relentlessly forward, essentially because they suit a political agenda.  There are lots of them out there like the idea that no one likes single payer health care even though almost every industrial nation in the world embraces it. You can see that there might be lots of uses for such a useful term.

I suggest we expand the usage a little and include ideas beyond the strictly political.  The global warming debate comes to mind.  There are folks out there who say that there is no consensus among scientists about this problem.  Well of course a 97% majority doesn't sound close to consensus to some, but most of us might agree that the "no consensus" idea is a Zombie and 97% is pretty much unanimous.  The earth as a six thousand year old orb looks like a Zombie as well.  We would have to throw out all of geology and archeology as well as nuclear physics and astronomy to breathe life into that Zombie Idea.

Like the movie and novel zombies many of us would like to see these Zombie Ideas bite the dust.  They take up space and use resources that Real Ideas need to become useful and prosper.  They allow liars and the lazy to pretend to being experts and they take us away from real debate about real problems.  Just like the movie zombies, we need to search out these Zombie Ideas and kill them.  Their parts need returning to the compost piles of our minds to be used to fertilize real ideas.

The problem, of course, is searching them out amid the mess and noise of modern life.  They sometimes disguise themselves as real ideas, shining themselves up to look new and important.  They're spottable by their lack of evidence or data.  Most are attributed to some expert who remains anonymous or is from another area of expertise.  Many use proof by assertion, (it's true because I say so), and if anyone begs to differ they say so again.

What I'd like would be a list of the most outrageous Zombie Ideas you and I can find.  Let's all start thinking and searching - let's expose these Zombie Ideas and see if we can make them crawl back to the compost pile.  Yes, you will find some ideas that look like zombies, but aren't.  We all have some zombies in our minds that we think are real live ideas as well - don't worry, someone out there knows the truth and will tell it to you even if you don't want to hear it.  If you want to be a part of this Zombie Idea Round-up just click on the pencil icon at the end of the blog and we can start rounding up Zombie Ideas before they overrun us.

American Success Formula? Be Born Rich and White!

There are things we know about The United States that we wish were not true.  We wish, for example, that race and ethnicity were a fading problem that Americans had mostly outgrown.  Of course we all know that time and enlightened regulation were supposed to save us from our prejudice and yet the latest report from The Fed's Office of Civil Rights Data in the Department of Education ( http://ocrdata.ed.gov ) says we have a long way to go.  If you're a data geek check them out - if not the New York Times has a summary (http://nyti.ms/1r30Klw) as does The PBS News Hour (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/study-education-inequality/).

If you're lazy like me here's the gist of it:  The kids who are brown or black or live in poor places or go to  poor schools are twice as likely to be suspended or disciplined as the white and well-to-do.  By the way, that includes the disturbing fact that many children of color receive their first suspension while still in pre-school.  What kind of school suspends three year olds?  Many poor schools don't provide the math and science classed needed to go to college or provide foreign language classes needed for entry to even the least picky Universities.  Why do we think this is the norm?  Are the black, brown and poor inferior undisciplined or just unlucky?

I don't think it's about any of those things.  My theory is that the middle class is using all their energy just holding their place.  Many would like to see things improve but don't have the energy or ideas to make improvement happen.  I also think that the white and well-to-do care very little about those who aren't.  I know that sounds harsh, but check out my post of October 7, 2013.  It speaks to the research into the attitudes of the well-to-do and shows conclusive evidence the rich's lack of empathy.

In spite of middle class apathy and the rich's distain we need to find ways the American Success Formula can help all of us.  The demography of the country and the need to treat all our citizens well requires it.  Soon the majority of us will be non-white and/or poor which, if we can't have equity of education and opportunity, will push us all toward anarchy or revolution.  Even the rich can see that as a bad outcome.

Here are some things we might think about.

1. Local control of education includes local funding which is inherently bad for poor districts.
2. There is no mandate for equity among schools.
3. Privatization only works for those who can afford it.
4. When people are too poor to live decent lives their children are too busy surviving to learn.
5. If we leave it to the rich, they will take care of themselves and no one else.

Please feel free to think of your own ideas, the problem needs multiple solutions and we all need to be part of the solution.  The only imperative I see is that the problems are large and growing and if we don't start to work in them now, they will become the kinds of problems that can only be solved by revolution.