dagblog - Comments for "A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism"

Footnote to this discussion

AmericanDreamer — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 16:21:22 +0000

In reply to A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism

Footnote to this discussion that I'd like to add on coming across this in John Nichols' recommended book The 'S' Word.

Wisconsinite Robert La Follette in 1924 sought the presidency as a progressive Republican on the Progressive party ticket in most states (on the Socialist Party line in others), embracing the Socialist Party endorsement in the course of winning 16.6% of the national vote for a campaign to "break the combined power of the private monopoly system over the political and economic life of the American people..."

La Follette said: "Free men of every generation must combat the renewed efforts of organized force and greed to destroy liberty...". His platform called for the government takeover of the railroads, elimination of private utilities, easier credit for farmers, outlawing of child labor, the right of workers to organize unions, increased protection of civil liberties, an end to U.S. imperialism in Latin America, and a national referendum before any president could lead the country into offensive war.

The Democratic party's nominee that year, John Davis, won the nomination as a compromise candidate on the 103rd ballot. His opposition to the KKK cost him support in the South and elsewhere. Davis and La Follette combined took about 45% of the popular vote and 149 electoral votes between them (136 of those going to Davis). A supporter of mandatory, "separate but equal" state segregation, Davis' final appearance as a litigator before the U.S. Supreme Court came in support of state segregated schools in a companion case to Brown v. Board of Education. Coolidge won without leaving the White House to campaign.

Also this (from wikipedia bio of him):

In 1957, a Senate Committee selected La Follette as one of the five greatest U.S. Senators, along with Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, and Robert Taft. A 1982 survey asking historians to rank the "ten greatest Senators in the nation's history" based on "accomplishments in office" and "long range impact on American history," placed La Follette first, tied with Henry Clay.

^{and this:}

In 1911, La Follette set up a campaign to mobilize the progressive elements in the Republican Party behind his presidential bid. He made a disastrous speech in February 1912 before a gathering of leading magazine editors that caused many to doubt his stability. Most of his supporters deserted him for Theodore Roosevelt^{[citation needed]}.

Embittered, La Follette opposed both Roosevelt and William Howard Taft in the 1912 election. When his former ally, Governor Francis E. McGovern, supported Roosevelt, La Follette broke with him, allowing the conservative Republicans under Emanuel Philipp to take control of Wisconsin in the decisive 1914 election. La Follette's forces were out of power in the state from 1912 to 1920.

Great piece, Destor. And

Oxy Mora — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 02:48:24 +0000

In reply to A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism

Great piece, Destor. And powerful last paragraphs.

Hey Sal. This was a

Qnonymous — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 00:20:31 +0000

In reply to Q! You can't drop a hint like

Hey Sal. This was a background piece I did (pretty crappy, but it was just aiming to get some of the basic nutrients into the mix.) Not sure when, but more serious pieces should follow - there and perhaps also posted at other sites. Trying to figure out how I can write about stuff I actually know first-hand, and may have had a... hand... in implementing. ;-)

Q! You can't drop a hint like

Saladin — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 21:07:16 +0000

In reply to Hey Sal. Thanks for the link.

Q! You can't drop a hint like that and then saunter off. What are you working on? Any links you could share? Or maybe even a posting?

Hey Sal. Thanks for the link.

Qnonymous — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 19:52:26 +0000

In reply to I would extend your list and

Hey Sal. Thanks for the link. Fit perfectly with some other stuff I was doing. Q

I would extend your list and

Saladin — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 09:48:15 +0000

In reply to I have read this a few

I would extend your list and include gerrymandering and the structural flaws inherent to our congressional institutions in particular the Senate (rural state dominance, minority filibuster, WY=CA, etc.). But you largely capture my thoughts as well. Truley deflating.

I have recently discovered Roberto Unger. I have just ordered his book, but this interview really resonated with my current thinking.

http://theeuropean-magazine.com/385-unger-roberto/386-the-future-of-the-...

I have read this a few

SleepinJeezus — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 08:19:14 +0000

In reply to A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism

I have read this a few different times now, Destor. I think you have really put your finger on something very uniquely considered. I like the "panglossian" framing. It's really helpful in understanding my own transformation from the "Gotta vote Dem or die!" position to one much more desperate and uncomfortable, perhaps best explained as "Does my vote really matter in the long run? Isn't the democratic system itself irretrievably broken, and quite purposefully so?"

I no longer trust any politician who has to rely upon the wealthy and the corporations to gain and maintain their position. (IOW, you can read this as "virtually ALL politicians" in this pay-to-play system.)

And most deflating of all, I no longer even trust the integrity of the voting process itself.

That's a tough spot to be in. And, yes, it makes me and others like me quite wild and unpredictable. But it also assures that we will not fall into the panglossian trap of believing that this is simply the cards we are dealt. I cannot imagine a worse outcome than continuing to play along with the status quo, hoping for change.

By the way, been busy working

Michael Maiello — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:06:10 +0000

In reply to Nice piece, Destor. When you

By the way, been busy working so forgot to thank you for this. A Shaw comparison made my week!

It can be said that the

Elusive Trope — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 16:29:24 +0000

In reply to A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism

It can be said that the anti-Panglossian elements are necessary. One only need to look to the artists and their role in society. The danger, as it has always been, in my opinion is when one takes the easy road of 'if an anti-Panglossian element is needed and necessary for a society to evolve in a positive way, then any element which can be characterized as anti-Panglossian should be embraced.' Anti-Panglossian elements may with the best of intentions make the situation worse.

A simple example is shock art. One significant role that art plays in the modern world is to 'shock' people - to get them to look at the world differently by doing something extremely provocative and profane. Yet this does not mean that any one particular piece or performance of shock art is of redeeming value simply because it attempts to play this role. The difficult path is to deeply engage the piece or performance, to look not only at the surface but the deep context in which it occurs.

I might have used the word

AmericanDreamer — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 16:06:32 +0000

In reply to A Tepid Defense Of Political Extremism

I might have used the word "radical" or maybe "unconventional" instead of "extremism" but to my way of thinking, to fail to notice and try different approaches when business as usual isn't cutting it is what truly requires explanation. Sometimes it just takes a lot of folks getting visibly worked up for the system to respond. At all. And hardly always in constructive ways that address the legitimate grievances that led folks to get worked up in the first place.