Emergency, Ehrenreich et al.!!!
by Oxz (Richard Martin Oxman, http://oxtogrind.org/archive/378)

“The poor create the rich hoax
And only late breast-fed fools believe it.
So don’t tell me about your success
Nor your recipes for my happiness” — Dionysiac Paulo Nutini

Special note: ZNet articles might be difficult to access without my assistance while the site is fund raising. I’d like Barbara Ehrenreich to glance at http://oxtogrind.org/archive/422 “Breaching the Choir” and http://oxtogrind.org/archive/423 “NOT A SYLLOGISM.” Ideally, before answering the questions at the very bottom of this article. [Pause.] I should be so lucky. We should.

“And that is how we should see the poverty of so many millions of low-wage Americans — as a state of emergency.” – Beautiful Barbara Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed

There are a few emergencies on the table, of course. Should be on the table, that is.

The thing is, OUR Governor of California (twelve unaffiliated, non-politician citizens serving together, making decisions on an equal basis, in lieu of a single self-serving careerist at the helm once again, http://oxtogrind.org/archive/364) would be able to — with the grassroots support I envision — address ALL the emergencies expeditiously, in unprecedented fashion… starting with health care (and the cancer epidemic). Health Care better than Medicare for one and all. Linked to radically improved health care education for the public AND medical professionals. With dinner, dinero, a dwelling, etc.

Without having to beg on our knees for passage of a Kucinich Amendment. Without petitioning for a weak Weiner Amendment or the like. Sans all that disingenuous activity which has led — and will always lead — to nowhere. [Pause.] Here’s where I lose you perhaps: People like Pelosi and Obama have no intention of doing the right thing by the vast majority of people. And “hope” can only reside in first giving up the possibility of hope being aroused in their quarters. The whole electoral arena is obviously stacked against our interests, as tainted at the core as actions taken by Holbrooke or McChrystal. Designed so that our every-working-day emergencies receive zero consideration, the lowest possible priority. Our meaning the 67% of full-time working people who require government aid and many, many others. Including every single soldier who serves, suicide or not.

The vast majority of Americans are going without proper health care. And just about everyone thinks that we’re in the process of addressing that abomination. Step by step — however long it takes, is the thought — we’re proceeding in the right direction, the only way possible.

“Ah, but it’s not to be. Unless Americans behave as a civilized people and raise holy hell over this immediately.” — David Swanson, Healthcare Hoax from Hell http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22985

WRONG. On several counts. In no special order: a) Petitions to gangsters won’t work; b) Following old paradigms for change won’t be sufficient (as citizens die from unbearable degeneration, moving in circles at an arthritic snail’s pace, circular pathways designed by the powers that be); c) civilized behavior — following traditional parameters (as set by the powers that be) — won’t cut the mustard; d) Writers, and everyone else professing heartfelt pain over concern for others, need to take action following a new paradigm immediately, and encourage others to do so. I’ll stop for the sake of brevity. [Pause.] There IS an alternative.

That’d be TAKING OVER. Which is based on calling a spade a spade. Without worrying about using civilized language in the process. Pelosi and Obama & Co., for all their eloquence and elitist dressing, are — to put it most simply — complicit in murder. With regard to health care and much more… like http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20090521.htm, drone attacks, sanctions, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., ETC., ETC.,…. You understand. [Pause.] Or do you?

Look, I know every single argument about why it’s impossible to organize low-wage earners and their first cousins in America, the disgruntled, the dissidents with all their differences… in daunting disarray. I also know all the arguments — every single one — which try to convince one and all that it’s impossible to secure what’s right via the electoral arena. And so on, and so on ad infinitum, all hellbent on maintaining the HELL we have holding hands with Resignation and Cynicism. I also know that well-informed, well-intentioned, deeply compassionate writers like David Swanson are primarily focused on their next article, their next book, their next appearance, etc. Not at all in the lovely loop for learning how to re-prioritize, not acknowledging that we already have more than enough documentation. [Pause.] At this juncture there is not a helluva lot of difference between a politician fund raising for her/his career, Code Pink or Greenpeace fund raising, and David Swanson having his primary focus be on his writing agenda. Not in terms of the deadlines we face. Not without a new paradigm added into the mix.

Don Quixote will have none of the nonsense. There is an alternative.

Instead of trying to enter the blocked front doorway*, you go through the back door. It happens to be open, but I submit that there’s nothing wrong with knocking it down if it happens to be locked. In civilized fashion… if you can. [Pause.] Move now, and it’s more likely to be open upon your arrival.

*Getting arrested plants seeds perhaps, and should not necessarily be discouraged (See http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/22987), but — at this juncture in activist history — we must question how much we should invest in putting heads on the chopping block. Is Self-Destructive Civil Disobedience a category?

“We will not succeed at all these things, certainly not all at once….” — Barbara Ehrenreich, Bright-Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America

We can succeed virtually overnight in creating a watershed in history vis-a-vis quality health care. Yes, we can. But not by holding onto hope provided by politicians. Yes, we can. But not by providing more documentation in lieu of action. Yes, we can. But not by following obsolete paradigms for change exclusively.

Look, there’s nothing wrong with signing a petition. And, yet, there’s EVERYTHING wrong with signing a petition… or going to a demonstration… or ____________________ (fill-in for you, for naming any old form of protest you like), IF you sincerely believe that that appeal is worthy of ALL your eggs being placed in the Gangsters’ Basket. IF you believe that you can plant ALL your seeds in the Gangsters’ Garden… and succeed.

Solution: Barbara Ehrenreich, or Elaine Bernard or Krissy Keefer or Angela Davis, embraces TOSCA http://oxtogrind.org/archive/364 in my imagination. One of them — with anyone she likes, anyone at all — handpicks eleven candidates to run on the same gubernatorial ticket as Dr. Wallace J. Nichols http://www.wallacejnichols.org/wallacejnichols/About_J..html, securing the participation of at least one California resident who can do a good job of advocating for the kind of health care described above. Once the ticket is agreed upon by the majority of folks (supporters/endorsers) listed at http://oxtogrind.org/archive/336 (and the majority of interested citizens who we can contact before the end of the year) — embracing feedback all along the way, tweaking the whole shebang from candidates to stances — my heroine Barbara (or one of the others, or you!?) can contact her immediate colleagues and immense following et al. (one-on-one and via public appearances)… making a pitch for movement in solidarity (TOSCA or something comparable). [Pause.] And so on. [Pause.] I mean, AND SO ON.

On the one hand, it’s absurd for me to focus on Barbara Ehrenreich. On the other hand, I am slated to conduct an interview with her on November 6th*, and she is simply as available as she is lovely… for the first week in November. I finally have access to her! [Pause.] I am dancing in the streets at the prospect of unconventional collective joy. Dramatic change for society.

*My ten questions for her are below.

You see, yesterday I talked about TOSCA to one of the big players within the ranks of the Gaza Freedom March. She promised to try to connect me with Medea Benjamin. If I get Medea to dialogue with me for a moment — EVERYONE is too too busy to talk at all about anything that’s not directly connected to their immediate agenda, as they perceive that — I could easily delineate how TOSCA might serve as a great follow-up to Code Pink’s planned confrontation with Israel… by pushing boycott, sanctions and divestment via California’s gubernatorial office. Without requiring any time. Without requiring any money. Without taking away from their focus on their immediate priorities, activities. All Medea would have to do is to put her imprimatur on TOSCA, and encourage (via email) all of their endorsers — Take a gander at their ENORMOUS list at http://www.gazafreedommarch.org/article.php?id=5032 — to do the same, hinting at the value of their also taking the action that I’m asking Barbara Ehrenreich to take.

Aside: Arguably, the single biggest obstacle to everyone being a part of this single project (whilst they do whatever else they’re doing) is… (unwarranted) positive thinking about representatives of the two major parties.

My proposal is in the interests of Code Pink’s worldwide agenda. It is also in the interests of Barbara’s United Professionals and all the unorganized non-professionals who are crying and dying daily unnecessarily because of poor (or no) health care. And all people who have a progressive bone in their body. Actually, it is in the interests of the vast majority of the American people. In the interests of the vast majority of the world.

I have significant differences with Code Pink. And I certainly couldn’t have thought positively about Obama with his campaign promise to continue our military’s abominations abroad… as I understand Barbara did. But none of that means anything when juxtaposed with the need for immediate macroscopic movement in solidarity.

A lot of people lack imagination. A lot of people don’t have a clue respecting what kind of good/necessasry trouble a Governor of California — with healthy mind and heart and soul — can stir up, what kind of action can be taken legally, nonviolently… unilaterally.

Our organizing — even if we run a losing campaign — is capable of creating historic waves. [Details upon request.]

But we must first stop with all the positive thinking about politicians.

Richard can be reached at tosca.2010[at]yahoo.com

————————————————————————————–

TEN QUESTIONS FOR BARBARA EHRENREICH

1. What did you hope to accomplish in writing Bright-Sided?

2. What surprised or shocked you as a result of your research for Bright-Sided?

3. How do you think “positive thinking” has undermined political activism?

4. In spite of the fact that on Democracy Now! you characterized Obama as a “thinker” (not a cheer leader for optimism, like Bush), is there anything about Obama that worries you respecting the promotion of positive thinking you describe in Bright-Sided?

5-7. The most prestigious cancer centers in the country — the Stanford University Cancer Center, for instance — seem to have significant downsides, to put it mildly. To cite just a few: a) Cafeterias offer up carcinogenic fare; b) Research money is often spent on underscoring facts long ago established (like noting that there are racial disparities in cancer outcomes; c) Chemotherapy is encouraged; d) Relative to genetics-based considerations –which are given a huge spotlight — the environmental causes of cancer are virtually ignored. Would you be willing (with Dr. Jim Coyne and Barbara Brenner of Breast Cancer Action) to confront the powers that be at Stanford on such issues? As a team would you be interested in helping the public to self-educate by taking part in a debate? If so, would you also be willing to proactively support a gubernatorial candidate in California who would forcefully, creatively and repeatedly — daily — help the public to self-educate about disingenuous practices, misinformation, misguided advice, scams, conflicts of interest, and myths common in the cancer community?

8-9. Do you believe that the people you focus on in Nickel and Dimed can be mobilized to strongly confront the vested interests delineated in Bright-Sided …at this moment in history …overcoming “learned helplessness” …”shaking off self-absorption” …and acting successfully within the electoral arena as it stands (with the potential for fraud)? If so, do you think that health care issues combined with living wage issues are a sufficient focus to mobilize a majority of voters in any given state?

10. What evidence is there to suggest that it’s possible and desirable to re-orient U.S. citizens — before we pass Climate Change deadlines — so that the “victims” of positive thinking described in Bright-Sided are able to give up the quest for unlimited personal financial gain, and embrace, say, something along the lines of Michael Albert’s Parecon, a socially/environmentally conscious economic theory?