View Full Version : Orlov on the presidential campaign
I think he has some interesting observations here:
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2012/01/dance-of-marionettes.html
It's election season in the US, which means that I have the unwelcome task of wading through well-intentioned though off-topic comments devoted to things political: who might be the next president, and whether or not it matters who the next president is (it doesn't). And rather than bear it quietly, I thought I'd say something about it.
Electioneering in the US is steadily expanding to fill more and more time and space even as it provides worse and worse results with each election cycle. The Congress is made of some of the least popular people on earth, who are manifestly incapable of achieving anything useful. They do seem quite ready and willing to pass laws that erode human rights and enhance the powers of the police state, but this is because they are paranoid. Perhaps their one point of consensus is that sooner or later their constituents will want to open fire on them.
Still, the elections provide a spectacle, the media are conditioned to lavish attention on the candidates, and the people, being weak-willed, are once again beguiled into thinking that it matters who gets elected. A few years of Obama impersonating Bush should have taught them that it doesn't matter who the Prisoner of the White House is. Likewise, watching the sad spectacle of Congress trying to raise the debt limit or to reign in runaway deficit spending should have taught them that this institution is no longer functional. (The US is about to bump up against the debt limit again; does anyone even care?) All of this should have been enough to make it clear to just about everyone that wondering what might be different if, say, Ron Paul got elected president, is like wondering what might be different if the moon were made of a different kind of cheese—your favorite kind, of course.
Leaving aside the meaningless question of who the next Figurehead in Chief might be, let's look briefly at what is perhaps the most corrupt institution the US has: the US Senate. Everyone knows that senate seats are for sale: as soon as a senator gets elected, he starts fund-raising, to finance his reelection campaign. Since each state, whether huge or puny, gets two seats, these are variously priced: the two seats for a large, populous state, like California or Texas, are very expensive, while the two seats for the puny State of Potatoho or some such, with its zero million inhabitants, are more reasonably priced. Since the senators themselves decide nothing and are simply mouthpieces to the moneyed interests which buy their seats, and since this is a very divided country, they are unable to achieve compromise, making the Senate completely useless as a deliberative body.
Let's face it: the senators are just marionettes controlled by giant bags of money. Their seats are definitely for sale, all of them, all the time. But then an odd thing happened about a month ago: the ousted Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in prison for allegedly attempting to sell the senate seat that was vacated when Obama was elected president. It seems like a stiff penalty for something that is a routine, daily occurrence, does it not? It is especially odd since other miscreants who actually caused serious damage, like former senator Jon Corzine, who looted investors' accounts to cover his gambling debts in the futures market, are still at large. What set Blagojevich apart is that he violated a taboo. Just like any normal criminal syndicate, the US Senate has rules by which the members preserve their positions and keep each other in check. As with a criminal syndicate, these rules have nothing to do with serving the public interest. One of these rules is that it is not allowed to sell a senate seat if it is unoccupied. Essentially, senators get to sell senate seats, governors don't. It is a tribal taboo: “Of course we can have sex with our underage daughters—we all do it—but not when they are menstruating! We are all good decent God-fearing Troglodytes!” Rod Blagojevich is the exception that proves the rule: senate seats are for sale.
It stands to reason, then, that the way to influence this political system, in its current advanced state of degeneracy, is not through the political process, which is just a pro forma activity that determines nothing. Armed with the understanding that it doesn't matter who gets elected, we should ignore the elections altogether. To get the government to respond, it is far more effective to organize around issues, pool resources, and hire lobbyists.
As for the rest of us, who do not have the means to hire lobbyists, there are still a few things we can do: we can starve the system by withholding resources from it, and we can bleed the system by extracting payments from it. If we are clever, we can also find ways to frustrate the system by artificially generating complexity. The system has been gamed to our disadvantage. We are not going to win by playing along. But we all win whenever we refuse to play the game.
If you simply can't resist the temptation to play the game, don't play it to win. Play it strictly for the entertainment value. Ignore the front-runners and focus on all the amusing types that have zero probability of being elected. Encourage them, give them airtime and attention. And if anybody wonders why their candidacy matters, use the opportunity to explain to them why none of these political marionettes matter at all.
Sadly enough, I can't say that I disagree with any of that observation. Do you suppose it really is getting close to revolution time? Are there other options left?
He is an interesting writer and has a unique perspective. That said, do you believe that any politician accomplishes anything beyond self commercial interest? Not being snarky but who was it that said democracy is the worst from of government except for all the others?
We do need some people to make some decisions for the benefit of the masses like sanitary services, justice, etc.
Since personal self-interest will take over quite quickly based on history from the records of antiquity, maybe politicians are just like us given the same temptations.
flowerseverywhere
1-10-12, 2:28pm
excellent and disheartening
Sadly enough, I can't say that I disagree with any of that observation. Do you suppose it really is getting close to revolution time? Are there other options left?
I think Simple Living contains the seeds of a useful sort of revolution, as per this point Orlov makes:
As for the rest of us, who do not have the means to hire lobbyists, there are still a few things we can do: we can starve the system by withholding resources from it, and we can bleed the system by extracting payments from it. If we are clever, we can also find ways to frustrate the system by artificially generating complexity. The system has been gamed to our disadvantage. We are not going to win by playing along. But we all win whenever we refuse to play the game.
A form of non-violent resistance, if you will. Deny your capital and labor to those who would oppress and enslave you. Build real community and social networks and local trade and all that good stuff.
http://codinghorror.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a85dcdae970b0128777073eb970c-pi
flowerseverywhere
1-10-12, 3:47pm
A form of non-violent resistance, if you will. Deny your capital and labor to those who would oppress and enslave you. Build real community and social networks and local trade and all that good stuff.
Bae, I could not agree with you more, but I feel like there are so few of us who feel like this. I know when my grandkids started coming I tried to only buy things made in the US. Therefore I am making dolls from vintage patterns (you can't even buy patterns any more), sewing them quilts and clothes and DH is doing woodworking. Try buying an american car that has most of the components built here, food grown in the US etc. It can be done, but it takes an awful lot of effort and can be much more expensive. I'll pay the price to eat off of hand thrown plates by a local artist that will last for a lifetime, but how many people will do that?
However, I was watching the republican debates and means testing for social security came up. I was annoyed, thinking all these years I have been saving money instead of spending it and now it could be means tested away while other people just spent spent spent. Then I got to thinking, you know all these years I have paid so much less in taxes than others have by driving cars into the ground, riding my bike instead of driving, buying things in garage sale, having a huge garden and using the same cast iron pans and corning baking dishes for 35 years. So I guess my tax will come at the end instead of all along. If only our government didn't waste so much money...
"elections don't matter" is one of those things people say when they want to sound terribly clever and sophisticated, but it isn't true. Elections do matter. Do you think Gore would have gone to war with Iraq? Billions of dollars and thousands of lives could have been saved if only the Supremes hadn't given it to Bush. Gore might have gone after the Taliban since 9/11 would have happened anyway...or would it have? Wouldn't Gore have paid attention to/known about The Taliban? Didn't Gore have the intellectual curiosity to question a report titled, 'The Taliban want to kill us' ?
Would McCain have tried to fix the health care system? Or regulate wall street? Or pulled us out of Iraq? Would McCain have ended don't ask don't tell? Would McCain have saved the auto industry and the millions of jobs tied to it.
Obama hasn't done everything I would hope he would, but he is not Bush. Not in the least. He actually has been fairly successful, which is definitely not Bush.
I agree the best defense is strong community and as much community self sufficiency as possible. But I don't view the government as enemy, since we are the government and the government is us. Through self sufficiency and simple living, I have learned very well to analyze the messages 'they' throw at me everyday. I don't just buy everything they say, be it how white the toothpaste will make my teeth to 'the government is the enemy and Obama is their king'. I am able to think for myself, independent of these messages. I just look at the messenger and the motive, and that usually tells me more than anything else.
But, building a strong community is always a good thing, in good times or bad.
Yes, a Senate where a Wyoming resident has 70 times the representation of a Californian is sick. Yes, the President of the United States is basically a prisoner of Congress and his own security and has nowhere near the power we attribute to the office.
Clearly, I'm not crazy about the political system as it stands, but the doomer porn of Kunstler and Orlov is not a useful response. I might not agree with either the Tea Party or Occupy (though I'm closer to the second), but they're making useful attempts to shake up the system.
I have to agree with bae and others that economic localization and stepping back from the credit card/multinational economy are powerful tools in influencing the Government.
ApatheticNoMore
1-11-12, 2:31am
Sadly enough, I can't say that I disagree with any of that observation. Do you suppose it really is getting close to revolution time? Are there other options left?
Understand the sentiment (wait do I get disappeared for saying that?). But such words are easy to say. Guerrilla armies CAN win revolutions against states (in fact they often do) but at a cost of IMMENSE bloodshed on their side. Look at the cost to the Iraqis of trying to resist the U.S. military. Oh the U.S. military is mostly gone from Iraq now, but far far more Iraqis died than U.S. soldiers. That's what a guerrilla army versus a nation state looks like. And look the U.S. is the most armed nation state on the planet (and I don't mean the citizenry - I mean the defense budget!) - this horror built up with our tax dollars.
Not being snarky but who was it that said democracy is the worst from of government except for all the others?
I don't think I'd even call the U.S. presidential elections at this point democracy. That are some shoddy knock off of the real thing. Entirely bought and paid for with immense sums of money, manipulated by a dishonest media, to leave us with the choice of two nearly identical candidates.
"elections don't matter" is one of those things people say when they want to sound terribly clever and sophisticated, but it isn't true. Elections do matter. Do you think Gore would have gone to war with Iraq? Billions of dollars and thousands of lives could have been saved if only the Supremes hadn't given it to Bush. Gore might have gone after the Taliban since 9/11 would have happened anyway...or would it have? Wouldn't Gore have paid attention to/known about The Taliban? Didn't Gore have the intellectual curiosity to question a report titled, 'The Taliban want to kill us' ?
You know that example doesn't even prove your point. That election wasn't lost. It was stolen. The popular vote indeed DID NOT MATTER in that case.
But I don't view the government as enemy, since we are the government and the government is us.
I have recently TORTURED a humanitarian worker. Just cause sadism turns me on you know. And why a humanitarian worker? Well why not, darn goody goody two shoes humanitarian workers! Oh wait that wasn't me, that was the U.S. government, so easy to get these two confused you know.
I have also just chosen to indefinitely detain myself, maybe I shall extraordinarily render myself too. It is not that the government trashed the constitution it is just that the majority of people in this country hate the Bill of Rights. Nah I really don't think so. They pass legislation that was originally drafted in closed door meetings, they pass it with a near total mainstream media blackout (a government gag order is the most scary potential explanation of what went on here, but there are more subtle possible explanations involving the media not being threatened so much as just "embeded" with the govt. etc.), while doing diversionary maneuvers and trying the best they can to say "hey look over there", during the holidays. Why? Because they know the immense outrage that would have been generated if only people were AWARE. That is the reality of the U.S. circa 2012.
You really can't generalize very well from U.S. government to all governments everywhere though since some countries seem to have much better functioning political systems, but the U.S. government is really really not representing the people these days. The people are quite divided, that is true, but the government still manages to pass legislation that almost everyone despises!
Clearly, I'm not crazy about the political system as it stands, but the doomer porn of Kunstler and Orlov is not a useful response.
agreed.
I might not agree with either the Tea Party or Occupy (though I'm closer to the second), but they're making useful attempts to shake up the system
agreed and frankly as we slide down toward the police state what they are doing in increasingly risky to them (at least to the extent it poses any threat to the status quo - and yes even protesting bailouts like the tea party poses that threat, and of course the more radical critique of Occupy does). But Occupy probably does know that they face that risk now. So why do it? Again because violent revolution would be a horror, even though it might be won, and so it is just another attempt to try to change things by peaceful means even if it carries increasing risk.
I have to admit I never really looked at localization as a form of revolution, but it does make sense. As a group I don't know anyone more fed up with the status quo than the current batch of 20-somethings. Having two kids in that range I hear quite a bit about it! Since the younger set tends to have more passion and more interest in making changes this might be a perfect time for a concerted localization movement to get fired up.
I have to admit I never really looked at localization as a form of revolution, but it does make sense. As a group I don't know anyone more fed up with the status quo than the current batch of 20-somethings. Having two kids in that range I hear quite a bit about it! Since the younger set tends to have more passion and more interest in making changes this might be a perfect time for a concerted localization movement to get fired up.
Doesn't Ron Paul have a big following among the younger generation? And look at his message: NO Fed, Slash taxes, slash government, slash intervention on foreign soil, slash entitlements, slash slash slash.
I think they call that a "push-down" in real estate where you buy the house with the intention of razing it and starting over. Back to basics is the populist message of the day--at least among those with less of a vested interest in the status quo. That's what I'm hearing.
I am a liberal-leaning independent, but I must admit, I find Paul's message really seductive. I'm glad at least he's survived to fight in South Carolina.
When I said elections do matter, I was referring to Orlov's idea that elections don't matter as one politician is the same as another and I was pointing out how things would probably have gone differently if Gore had the office. I agree, the election was stolen, but that doesn't usually happen. How often has it come down to the Supremes deciding? And I do believe it is usually the popular vote, although clearly it hasn't been sometimes.
We are the government and the government is us. If we try to separate the government from us, make it a separate entity which is enemy, then we lose the power to control it. The people who tortured weren't 'the government' but people backed by other people WE elected. And they really aren't backed by most of our elected folks, torture is against our laws, but we the people don't seem to have the stomach to get to the bottom of who exactly authorized this torture, and hold them responsible, cause that gets uncomfortably close to the president/vice president/secretary of state/defense, etc.. This is how we have lost power. Instead of demanding our elected (i.e. the WE we sent to represent us) leaders conduct a real investigation into who gave that authorization, we just throw up our hands and curse 'the government' as if it's not something we created and control, and move on to silly distractions that really don't mean anything.
I guess it's easier to grumble and curse a separate bloated entity instead of accepting that we are that entity, but I don't want to do that. This is my country, and your country, and like it or not, we are responsible for it's actions. I know lots of people like to talk about get rid of the fed government and bring it local, but if we don't have the stomach to police Washington, what makes anyone think we would do it at state?
You don't like that bill provision they recently voted for? Ok, here's a suggestion. Find out who put that provision into the bill (provisions don't just appear, someone, a real person, had to actually put it in there) And vote that sucker out immediately, without any hesitation. Then, to all those others who voted yes to that, put them on notice that if they don't work now to reverse that, they too will be kicked to the curb.
We are the government and the government is us. Look at what is happening in Wisconsin. The people there get it. They are that government and they aren't happy. Whether you agree with their position or not is besides the point. They are learning that they have the power, the government is them, and whatever the outcome, you know future leaders WILL remember this!
"We are the government and the government is us."
The problem is I don't think those in government believe that.
ApatheticNoMore
1-11-12, 12:48pm
Oh fight the good fight as far as getting our congresspeople to change. Do you know how many letters I have sent to congresspeople recently btw? Well 6 with plans to send more :).
But do realize it's a game with loaded dice. And where any chance of change is going to come as far as federal government is the HOUSE OF REPRESENATATIVES. I tend to agree the Senate is corrupt (corrupted by money, the Occupy movement gets this, they call it the 1% or whatever, yes of course the generalization is too broad, but the Senate has indeed been corrupted by money). And if you think they are corrupt wait until you get to the Presidency. Talk about corrupted by money. Say I hate indefinite detention without trial (just hypothetically say i hate it :laff:). I hate that Obama signed it. So maybe people should not have voted for Obama. But the candidate running against Obama (McCain) actually WROTE the legistlation. Do you understand how we are playing a game with loaded dice? Heads they win, tails you lose. The congress so represents the people at this point that they have a 5% approval rating.
You don't like that bill provision they recently voted for? Ok, here's a suggestion. Find out who put that provision into the bill (provisions don't just appear, someone, a real person, had to actually put it in there) And vote that sucker out immediately, without any hesitation. Then, to all those others who voted yes to that, put them on notice that if they don't work now to reverse that, they too will be kicked to the curb.
Oh I fully intend to.
Meanwhile I literally DREAD Congress being back in session. More tyranical bills to come (sopa, pipa, enemy expatriation). Really that seems to pretty much be ALL that is on their docket. All "democratically" voted tyranny, all the time.
A form of non-violent resistance, if you will. Deny your capital and labor to those who would oppress and enslave you.
Kind of a Marcuse style "great refusal"?
Kind of a Marcuse style "great refusal"?
Kind of a John Galt opting out? In his more fevered moments, FDR used to complain about a "capital strike".
ApatheticNoMore
1-12-12, 3:37pm
Or just a GENERAL STRIKE. There has never been one in this country.
"A general strike is a strike action by a critical mass of the labour force in a city, region, or country. While a general strike can be for political goals, economic goals, or both, it tends to gain its momentum from the ideological or class sympathies of the participants. It is also characterized by participation of workers in a multitude of workplaces, and tends to involve entire communities. The general strike has waxed and waned in popularity since the mid-19th century, and has characterized many historically important strikes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_strike
Alas I think you could never get enough people to participate in the U.S. to make it work. So I think bae is really just asking what people can actually do as individuals. Maybe call it SANCTIONS against the out of control ROUGE state of the U.S..
But hey if people in other countries want to start boycotting things made in this country, I wouldn't blame them either. But quite honestly I'm not sure that would hurt the right people. It would mostly just hurt ordinary working people IMO, when our problem here is our government has gone fascist.
Doesn't Ron Paul have a big following among the younger generation? And look at his message: NO Fed, Slash taxes, slash government, slash intervention on foreign soil, slash entitlements, slash slash slash.
It's pretty clear that the U.S. Government is overcentralized, a by-product of WWII and the federal role in the civil rights movement and the cold war.
The question is how do you unravel that when, given a chance, about a third of the states would enact explicit discrimination against gays and ethnic/religious minorities, ten or so would put major roadblocks in the way of traditionalist religious and social groups, and several would put their handicapped and unemployable poor on the Greyhound (http://books.google.com/books?id=A29BVt1my9IC&pg=PA334&lpg=PA334&dq=new+york+welfare+%22bus+ticket%22+north+mayor+l indsay&source=bl&ots=3bTkUpneMy&sig=7zeX9ClxrIqBAY-c0z49QViTmEE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=K80QT7y8Dsry0gH6wLGDAw&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false) to richer states.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.