SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby stickdog99 » Sat Feb 15, 2020 9:00 pm

Caitlyn Johnstone (original has links and videos)

Sometimes it feels like the only news stories over the last five years have been about mean tweets. Trump’s mean tweets, Sanders supporters’ mean tweets; some days it’s all the headlines ever want to talk about. You’d hardly know humanity is on the precipice of extinction on multiple fronts.

If you are the sort of person who believed that the “Bernie Bro” talking point would vanish after statistics showed the narrative of Sanders’ base consisting mostly of entitled white men to be completely false, then you are probably the sort of person who is often wrong about things. Whether the headlines are about an MSNBC host comparing Berners on Twitter to literal Nazi brown shirts, Meghan McCain bashing Sanders and then calling his supporters “nasty and cruel” for responding, or a Nevada culinary union dishonestly smearing Sanders on healthcare and then shrieking about being “viciously attacked” by online criticism, this garment rending over angry Bernie Bros remains more popular than ever.

Which, as we’ve discussed previously, is ridiculous. Acting like a few angry social media comments are in any way an inappropriate response to a millionaire narrative manager passive-aggressively sabotaging people’s attempts to fight crushing domestic austerity and create a working healthcare system for themselves is cartoonish drama queenery, and anyone who does this should be mocked by the entire world.

The Elizabeth Warren-supporting writer Sam Adler-Bell — a much less powerful player than the wealthy corporate media pundits who are seen on TV by millions every day — shared his experience with incurring the wrath of Sanders supporters on Twitter.

“Thanks to my squishy ‘be nice to Warren’ takes, I’ve experienced a lot of the storied online Bernie Bro attacks,” Adler-Bell tweeted. “And you know what? Not that bad. Pretty normal stuff. Small faction. I mute and move on. Maybe not a national headline that should last 4+ years.”\

The popular explanation for these absurd establishment conniptions over the insolent common folk daring to talk back to their masters is that it’s being used to smear Sanders, and of course that’s true; Sanders is consistently attacked for having rude supporters. A more detailed understanding is that it’s also due to a media class whose ivory towers previously insulated them from the reactions of the riff raff being unable to handle a new paradigm where op-eds receive digital comments from an energized populist political faction, and that’s obviously true as well. But the primary reason the establishment narrative managers are becoming increasingly shrill about the online behavior of Sanders supporters runs much deeper: they’re afraid of it because it’s effective.

I’ve been writing for a long time about the possibility of a grassroots information rebellion in which ordinary people use new media in sufficient numbers to actually seize control of important dominant narratives, and, at least within the limited scope of Sanders’ presidential campaign, we’re seeing an actual model for what such an insurgency might look like. In their endless freeform improvisation on social media, Berners have demonstrated the ability to unearth information and launch it into virality, to collectively send hashtags to the top of Twitter’s trending list like #ILikeBernie, #BloombergIsRacist and #WarrenIsASnake, and to meme top presidential campaigns like that of Kamala Harris completely out of existence.

Centrist elitists are fond of saying “Twitter isn’t real life”, meaning the dominant views you’ll see on social media aren’t necessarily reflective of the broader public, and of course that’s true. But clearly Twitter, like any other large and influential media platform, is able to help shape narratives which affect real life. The difference is that unlike other forms of billionaire-owned media, Twitter allows for the possibility of a grassroots campaign by the people to influence those narratives.

Even if you’re not a Sanders supporter I highly recommend keeping tabs on his online base, because it’s a force that is truly something to behold. And also because it sets an example of something that could change the world, if people could just figure out a way to expand their grassroots information rebellion beyond the scope of a single candidate’s presidential campaign.

And that’s the real reason the imperial narrative managers are so freaked out about it. Not because anyone is being “viciously attacked”, but because they understand that narrative control is power. The people collectively seizing control of the dominant narratives within the empire is the stuff of oligarchic nightmares, because whoever controls the narrative controls the world.

Power is the ability to control what happens. Absolute power is controlling what people think about what happens.Humans are story-oriented creatures, so if you can control the stories that the humans are telling about what’s going on, you can control those humans. Any adept manipulator understands this. So they understand that the people taking control of dominant narratives is a direct threat to their rule.

The oligarchs who control the US-centralized empire would literally kill for such a large and highly energized collective advancing pro-establishment narratives of their own free will, but they know they can’t get one because the status quo offers ordinary people nothing to get excited about. They can only obtain narrative control by purchasing it, whether it’s by advertising, buying up media outlets, funding think tanks, or paying online influencers like Mike Bloomberg.

You can’t buy grassroots energy. Oligarchs find this endlessly frustrating, like an insecure Wall Street executive who can buy anything in the world besides a large penis. They’ve tried to emulate it, as with the so-called “Resistance” astroturf campaign designed to harness the energy of the 2016 Sanders run and corrall it into support for the Democratic establishment against Trump, but it falls flat without any shiny, attractive thing to positively push toward. So since they can’t replicate grassroots energy they do the next best thing: they attack it.

That’s all you’re ever seeing when imperial narrative managers try to disparage and discredit Berners online. They’re doing the exact same thing they’ve been doing with alternative media and RT: attacking a source of unauthorized narratives because they are unable to control it.

As I said from the very beginning, Sanders’ 2020 campaign is much more interesting as a movement than as a presidential candidacy. If Sanders manages to get in he’ll push for a few changes which will be ferociously opposed every step of the way by existing power structures, and some mild reforms will end up taking place. If the people figure out how to use the power they tapped into during his campaign to take control of dominant narratives, they can actually transform the world.

So let the narrative managers educate you with their fake tears. They are informing you of your power. Use it to wisely. Use it to birth a healthy world into existence.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Elvis » Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:12 pm

a Nevada culinary union dishonestly smearing Sanders on healthcare and then shrieking about being “viciously attacked” by online criticism


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-sanders-nevada/democrat-sanders-nevada-union-in-escalating-feud-ahead-of-state-nominating-contest-idUSKBN207031

“It’s disappointing that Senator Sanders’ supporters have viciously attacked the Culinary Union and working families in Nevada simply because our union has provided facts on what certain healthcare proposals might do,” Geoconda Argüello-Kline, the union’s Secretary-Treasurer, said in a statement, without sharing specific attacks.


Geoconda Argüello-Kline is not a hash slinger, he's a board member of the Center for American Progress aka CAP, the fake-progressive think-tank founded by John Podesta and headed by Clinton '16 honcho Neera Tanden (she's in the emails).

Here's more about how the whole situation was fabricated with the help of Jon Ralston, the "I just hate socialists" Nevada newsman responsible for the 2016 false report of people throwing chairs.


https://medium.com/@kevin_33184/bernie-sanders-and-the-culinary-workers-behind-effort-in-nevada-to-undermine-support-for-him-f9f10ccf815c

Bernie Sanders And The Culinary Workers: Behind Effort In Nevada To Undermine Support For His Campaign
Kevin Gosztola
Feb 15

Weeks before the Nevada caucuses, Senator Bernie Sanders’ Democratic presidential campaign engaged in massive outreach to rank-and-file workers in the Culinary Workers Union, which is viewed as highly influential in the state.

The Sanders campaign talked to workers at their homes and work sites. They sent “hundreds of thousands of pieces of mail to culinary workers, who are Latino in Nevada.”

Yet, about a week before early voting started in the Nevada caucuses, the Culinary Workers Union leadership moved to suppress interest and support for Sanders among their own members.

Leadership approved and distributed a “union scorecard” for presidential candidates that singled-out Sanders as a candidate who would “end Culinary Healthcare,” “require Medicare For All,” and “lower drug prices.”

The Nevada Independent, a “nonpartisan nonprofit news and opinion website founded in 2017 by veteran political journalist and commentator Jon Ralston,” gained notoriety for reporting on the scorecard. Coverage stirred anger among lowly Sanders supporters, and the narrative evolved: “Democrat Sanders, Nevada union in escalating feud ahead of state nominating contest.”

It upset several rank-and-file workers, including workers in the larger umbrella organization known as UNITE HERE. They urged members to sign on to a letter of support for Sanders and Medicare For All.

Union leadership announced on February 13 they would not endorse any candidate.

What went virtually ignored was the conflicts of interest of the Nevada Independent, as well as the record Ralston has as a political journalist known for promoting false stories and manufacturing the news. Nor was there attention given to the Culinary Health Fund and the incentive that union leadership has to drive a wedge between Sanders and rank-and-file workers.

As POLITICO noted, the Culinary Workers Union and its affiliates “represent some 60,000 workers in the restaurant and hospitality industries in Las Vegas and Reno. It is also the largest immigrant organization in the state, with Latinos accounting for more than half of its membership, and it is a major source of voter mobilization.”

“Nevada is the early voting state with the largest Latino population, 29 percent,” POLITICO added.

Ralston’s Nevada Independent has received $957,500 from MGM Resorts International, which owns The Mirage, $145,000 from Caesars Enterprise Services LLC, $31,500 from Boyd Gaming, and $7,500 from Caesars Entertainment.

The Culinary Health Fund is what is known as a multi-employer Taft-Hartley Fund. It pays for health insurance coverage for members through collective bargaining agreements.

Employer trustees for the Culinary Health Fund include executives from Boyd Gaming, Caesars Palace, Hilton Worldwide, Hostmark Hospitality Group, Hyatt Hotels and Resorts, The Mirage, Sodexo, Starwood Hotels and Resorts, Tishman Hotel Corporation, and Geneva HRM Advisors, which is involved in corporate labor relations.

Neither of these donors were disclosed at the bottom of the Nevada Independent’s coverage, despite the outlet’s stated commitment to transparency. However, the outlet acknowledged the Culinary Workers Union donated $7,325 to support their work.

The casino and gaming corporations, which financially support the Nevada Independent, have an incentive to keep contract negotiations focused on health care to limit the leverage union workers have to demand better pensions, higher wages, and improved workplace conditions, which may undercut profits.


Spreading Fake News During The 2016 Primary

Ralston will be one of the moderators for the MSNBC/NBC News Democratic presidential debate in Las Vegas, which is scheduled for February 19. :shock:

In 2016, according to Snopes, a leading fact-checking organization, Ralston falsely claimed that Sanders supporters “threw chairs at a Nevada convention.” It was “widely reproduced by other news outlets,” including MSNBC, CBS, the Associated Press, and the New York Times.

“Convention ended w/security shutting it down, Bernie folks rushed stage, yelling obscenities, throwing chairs. Unity Now! On to Philly 2/2,” Ralston tweeted. He also declared., “Hey, Berniebot chair-throwing truthers: It happened. People saw it, including one journalist who was there and reported it.”

Around three weeks before the Nevada caucuses in 2016, Ralston “reported” that “operatives from Bernie Sanders’ campaign [had] donned Culinary union pins and secured access to employee areas inside [Las Vegas] Strip hotels to try to garner votes for the February 20 caucus,” according to “sources.”

A headline at his personal website read, “Sanders workers are masquerading as Culinary members to campaign inside hotels.”

Geoconda Argüello-Kline, the secretary-treasurer for the union, “confirmed” the reports of Sanders’ staffers “attempting and gaining access to employee dining rooms.” She said the union was “disappointed and offended,” and added, “It’s completely inappropriate for any campaign to attempt to mislead Culinary Union members, especially at their place of work.”

Neera Tanden, the Center for American Progress director who was a part of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, gleefully shared a link from CAP’s Think Progress website, where the story from Ralston was boosted. [b]“See we are not always bad!” :shock: (Argüello-Kline is a member of CAP’s Advisory Board.)[/b]

Jennifer Palmieri, who was the Clinton campaign’s communications director, replied, “It’s great!”

CNN followed-up on the report. Jeff Weaver, the campaign manager for Sanders’ 2016 campaign, maintained no staffers “ever misrepresented who they were.” In fact, Sanders staffers wore the Culinary Union’s button “in solidarity with people” in the union. They also wore “Bernie paraphernalia.”

Emilia Pablo, who was the Nevada communications director for Sanders, was stunned by the response of the Culinary Workers Union. “It is surprising because we have been building a positive relationship with them from the moment that we go to the ground. We have always thought we have had a positive relationship with them and for them to come out so strongly against us and to go to the press first, that surprises me.”

In both election cycles, the effort to undermine support among not only rank-and-file members but also Latinos in Nevada came as Sanders surged in the polls. Clinton, as Ralston reported, saw a 25-point lead in Nevada evaporate after Sanders’ huge victory in New Hampshire.

A national Morning Consult poll released on February 12 showed Sanders surged 10 percent among Latino voters to 48 percent. “Political strategy company Plus Three found in a study published [February 13 that Sanders has four times the donations from Hispanics of any other Democrat running for president,” according to Common Dreams.

“In Iowa’s 12 Hispanic-majority caucuses, Sanders got more than 66 percent of the raw vote. The next highest percentage was former Vice President Joe Biden, with close to 11 percent of the vote,” wrote Al Día’s Nigel Thompson.

Biden’s campaign has cratered since the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, leaving industry interests panicked that Sanders may pick up a massive win in Nevada.


Culinary Workers Town Hall ‘Was Not Pretty For Bernie Sanders’

Although Jon Ralston did not author the reporting at the Nevada Independent, he went on MSNBC multiple times to promote the agenda of Culinary Workers Union leadership.

“The union has basically said to members, listen — this is the leadership, of course. We have your best interests at heart. We have gotten you this Cadillac plan. Bernie Sanders wants to take that away,” Ralston declared on “MSNBC Live” on February 13. “Whether you agree with that characterization or not, that is the messaging to their members.”

Ralston added, “Bernie Sanders and the other candidates went and did town halls with the Culinary members. The issue [of health care] came up, and it was not pretty for Bernie Sanders.”

Yet, video of the town hall, which occurred on December 10, shows Ralston is misrepresenting or outright exaggerating the tension that occurred between Sanders and union members.



https://youtu.be/LW4CegcWb7M


At the town hall, Sanders was told by a member, who was part of the Frontier Hotel and Casino worker strike, one of the longest labor strikes in history, that she wanted to keep her Culinary Health Plan. She was very concerned about losing coverage if Medicare For All was adopted.

Sanders let her speak, and then he launched into part of his stump speech. “Number one, we’re going to expand Medicare to cover dental care. Because dental care is health care,” and, “We’re going to make sure everyone in America who need it has hearing aids, has eyeglasses.”

“And the other thing that we are going to do is have Medicare cover home health care so that elderly people are not pushed out of their homes,” Sanders added.

Workers cheered and applauded the policy proposals, which Sanders advocated.

“We are going to have Medicare For All because we are going to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and lower drug prices significantly. Nobody will pay more than $200/year for prescription drugs,” Sanders promised.

A small group of members in attendance chanted, “Union health care! Union health care!” But Sanders never lost control of the room. He directly addressed the concern about their union health plan.

“Because we spend so much on health care, your employer is spending a lot on your health care,” Sanders replied. He argued ending the “bureaucratic nightmare of thousands of separate health programs that have to be administered” would save “hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Medicare For All would mean “your employer will not have to pay $15,000 a year for your health care. Your employer will pay $3,000. That’s a $12,000 differential. You know who gets the $12,000? You get the $12,000,” Sanders stated.

What Sanders said was met with cheering and applause, and he reiterated some of the points he previously made then concluded his answer. The crowd applauded, and by that time, there was no more chanting or disruptions.

Still, D. Taylor, who once led and grew Culinary Workers Union, took the microphone and said, “I believe in town hall meetings, but we’re going to let candidates speak without any sort of heckling. And if you want to heckle, go outside.”

Workers did not boo or become angry when Taylor scolded a small group in attendance. They did not object. Rather, there were people who clapped when Taylor admonished them.

Furthermore, Taylor declared, “This union stands very strongly that every single American, just like Senator Sanders has said, deserves to have good quality health care. It is a right. It should never be a privilege in this country,” which workers applauded.

Ralston and the Nevada Independent omitted any specific details from this town hall from their coverage. Nor did they explore any of the issues around union health care.


‘I Just Hate Socialists’

Weaver previously described Ralston as a “journalist/talking head held out as a local expert on state politics — your go-to insider.”

He wrote in his book, How Bernie Won, “Most states have one. Unlike most, Ralston’s view is, shall we say, more ‘truthy’ than truthful.”

The “truthiness” of Ralston’s views inflame widespread opposition to the very brand of cynical political journalism that he has peddled to make a name for himself. Dividing or undermining support among Latinos, who support or are interested in the Sanders campaign, benefits industry interests in Nevada and beyond.

Image

Back on April 25, 2017, the Las Vegas Democratic Socialists of America asked Ralston, “What bias do you operate under then? What is your ideology? Educate us.” He responded, “I just hate socialists.”

Finally, Ralston and The Nevada Independent claim to be nonpartisan, but Stephen Cloobeck, the founder of Diamond Resorts International and a big-money donor to the Democratic Party, has contributed $600,000 to the Nevada Independent.

In 2016, he donated $1 million to Priorities USA, a Super PAC aligned with Clinton, and over a half million to the HIllary Victory Fund and Hillary Action Fund. He also gave $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee.

Many rank-and-file workers in the Culinary Workers Union and UNITE HERE believe Medicare For All would offer them a huge benefit because it would “expand and improve” upon their health care “benefits and choices available to members.” It would “provide benefits” to their “extended family and adult children currently excluded” from their plans.

Expanding Medicare For All would “guarantee uninterrupted health care regardless of layoff, job loss, or disability.” It would “completely eliminate out-of-pocket costs, such as co-pays and premiums.” And it would “guarantee money saved by employers will go to workers” — and not bosses, giving members a pay raise.

Ralston, the Nevada Independent, and the corporate interests that fund his media outlet are entrenched in the status quo, which is why they push a story about literature from the Culinary Workers Union leadership that divisively suggests Sanders is as much of a threat to rank-and-file workers as Trump.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7563
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby stickdog99 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:52 am

stickdog99
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Sounder » Thu Feb 20, 2020 3:18 pm

I try to be open minded, yes I admit, to my own detriment at times, when reading or listening. So with this Counterpunch article I'm going OK, OK, sounds at least close, some puzzlement at the metaphor usage, that's okay as I'm not always the sharpest tool in the box. Then the tell comes at the end, which made me laugh, not something that happens often for me, so thanks for that.

In a paper that seems to be a salute to irony, the author endorses communism while necessarily blind the reality that transnational corporations use the CCP to suppress workers and dissent so they can make even more billions than they would otherwise. Fuck, communism is a better protection racket for the 'ruling class' than is capitalism.


Things will only get more calamitous for the ruling class as the inevitable arm of communism comes down upon them. As the phrase goes, if you can see it from the front, wait until you see it from the back. Right now the resistance is in front of the ruling class. They fear it now. But they haven’t begun their nightmare. Once the revolution has happened the ruling class will be in jail.


No, the 'ruling class' will not be in jail, the 'ruling class' will continue trying to roll out 5-G and the rest of their surveillance state jail for everyone but themselves, as long as we the public, for whatever reason, produce anemic and shallow analysis of our situation.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:17 pm

.

Nick Pemberton's an interesting writer. I think he's got a lot of potential, but he does these kinds of extended, ironic-mystic-metaphorical koan-logic-puzzlers that I don't always get either. The one from last week also caused some confusion for me, but was much more fun.

The Overwhelming Sex Appeal Of Bernie Sanders https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/14 ... e-sanders/

I looked him up the other day and from the looks of it he's still in college.

To be truthful, in the category of Articles about Bloomberg in Counterpunch dated February 20, 2020, my surprise preference goes to the one I wrote - more of a pragmatic, acre-by-acre, scorched-earth approach.

Bloomberg is the Equal Evil
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/20 ... qual-evil/

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Iamwhomiam » Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:07 am

Great article, Jack. Well done. Honestly, the best coverage of Bloomberg I've read, and thoroughly accurate.

"An oligarch is trying to buy the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination with cash payments from his own personal fortune. If his takeover attempt succeeds, it will smash the party and assure the reelection of Donald Trump. Given their shared interests, we might wonder whether that is Michael Bloomberg’s true intent. His cynical campaign is based on deceiving people into believing the opposite, that he would be a strong candidate against Trump."

I believe it is his only intent, to assure Trump's reelection. Good ol' Citizens United!

Demexit is all but guaranteed.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby stickdog99 » Fri Feb 21, 2020 5:42 am

stickdog99
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby liminalOyster » Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:29 pm

Nevada down and almost surely by what even Nate Silver calls a "large" margin. It's a good day, again.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Grizzly » Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:31 pm

Image

Whose House?
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4908
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Feb 23, 2020 3:22 am

https://slate.com/culture/2020/02/sande ... minee.html

Bernie Sanders has won the Nevada Caucuses, and rank-and-file Democrats who responded to the senator’s far-fetched “maybe things could be a little bit less awful” platform have once again exposed themselves as pie-in-the-sky idealists who have failed to learn the lessons of history. Specifically, they have failed to learn the lessons of the 1919 propaganda film Bolshevism on Trial, a searing portrait of the threat our beloved center-right nation faces from the twin evils of socialism and no-fault divorce. If the party leadership once again fails to protect Democratic voters from their own policy preferences, we could be headed towards a repeat of the disastrous presidential election of 1920, when the starry-eyed revolutionaries on the James M. Cox / Franklin D. Roosevelt ticket got their newfangled electric clocks cleaned by Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge. (Imagine what Roosevelt might have accomplished if he hadn’t foolishly derailed his career!) Senator Sanders’ supporters must reckon with the specter of the 1920 electoral map, or we could be headed for a nightmare scenario in which the Democrats’ foolhardy embrace of socialism allows Donald Trump, like Harding before him, to carry 37 out of all 48 states!

To people who aren’t experts in analyzing the American political scene, it might seem misguided to base one’s entire worldview on a single presidential election that happened decades ago, much less assume that propaganda created to convince voters whose primary electoral concern was “I would prefer not to die from the Spanish Influenza” might be any less effective today. But what this analysis fails to consider is that I first encountered Bolshevism on Trial at a very impressionable age! And although it’s true that director Harley Knoles’ other movies—Miss Petticoats, Oh, Baby!, Wanted: A Mother, et al—might not command the audiences they once did, Knoles also directed the lost, silent 1918 adaptation of Little Women, which means he basically has the same cultural credibility with young voters as Greta Gerwig. Pitting Bernie Sanders against a cultural juggernaut like the Mayflower Photoplay Company of Boston, Massachusetts is a surefire way to convince young voters to stay home and hand the election to Donald Trump.

Pundits who parrot tired talking points like “Bolshevism on Trial is a mediocre work of filmmaking from more than a century ago that should have no more relevance to contemporary politics than The Knickerbocker Buckaroo, a film from the same year in which Douglas Fairbanks plays a society swell who gets mistaken for a Mexican bandit” are being disingenuous. Granted, The Knickerbocker Buckaroo’s legacy did not endure, and neither did my editorial “The Legacy of The Knickerbocker Buckaroo Will Endure Forever,” or my book “The Knickerbocker Buckaroo” Will Never, Ever Be Any Less Relevant as a Work of Political Analysis Than It Is Today and I’ll Stake My Entire Reputation on It. But Bolshevism on Trial is the movie that the Jennings Daily Times-Record of Jennings, Louisiana famously proclaimed “the timeliest picture ever screened” on June 3, 1919! That kind of cachet doesn’t just die out, like the generations of voters who took its message to heart. The party needs a positive message for the twenty-first century, and what message could be more positive than, “We should be running scared”?

What critics of Bolshevism on Trial don’t realize is that the film’s timeless story still resonates deeply with the American public. Do Sanders supporters expect us to believe that rank-and-file Democrats don’t see themselves in the character of Norman Worth, the son of a wealthy industrialist who returns from fighting the Kaiser only to discover that his girlfriend, the “orphan daughter of a famous family,” has joined the Reds and is giving an address at Comrades’ Hall? The American people are not easily fooled, and they are not deaf to the way wild promises like, “maybe we shouldn’t make other people ration insulin until they die” echo the revolutionaries in Bolshevism on Trial and their demonic plan to turn an abandoned resort in Florida into a free-love forced-labor camp. Attempts to muddy the issue by demonizing job creators like Bolshevism on Trial’s Colonel Bradshaw will fail in the face of the intertitle that introduces him, a campaign-consultant-friendly bulleted list of reasons not to be mad at rich people that will no doubt appear in a Michael Bloomberg ad before this is all over:

Colonel Henry Bradshaw, a brain worker, whose inventions have

—increased the comfort of his generation

—created work for thousands of employees

—brought wealth to himself


Bolshevism on Trial also offers plenty for voters who don’t see themselves becoming “brain workers” anytime soon. What white working-class voter in Michigan or Pennsylvania doesn’t relate to Tom Mooney, “Norman’s chauffeur and friend—very handy with his knuckles,” who relocates to Florida swampland at the drop of a hat to engage in vigorous fisticuffs with anyone who dares speak ill of his boss’s kid? What’s more, anyone making the dubious claim that minorities aren’t very sympathetic to defenders of the status quo will have to reckon with the character of Saka, a Native American friend of Norman’s who seems to be employed as his gardener and turns down socialist pipe dreams with folksy wisdom like, “Indian must feed self—must plant—hunt—or die. White man same.” In fact, it is Saka who ultimately saves Norman Worth from the perils of communism, by sending Norman’s father a telegram reading “HEAP BIG TROUBLE ON ISLAND,” which prompts the United States Marines to invade. Is the Democratic Party no longer the natural home for people of color whose lived experience has given them an abiding love of calling for United States military intervention by telegram? There’s simply no way of anticipating how many voters just like Norman, Tom, and Saka will turn out in the general election, so the only rational strategy for the Democrats is to pick a candidate that will be acceptable to these hypothetical fictional voters featured in a silent film released in 1919.

But nothing I can tell you about the way Bolshevism on Trial proves that the Democratic Party must nominate a crypto-Republican in 2020 can possibly compare to the experience of watching the movie for yourself. Brace yourself for a sobering look at the kind of opposition research Donald Trump would be able to unleash against Bernie Sanders in a general election:

Utterly convincing, and utterly devastating to the naïve Democrats who believe that we should nominate a presidential candidate who wants to improve things, somewhat. But if you still don’t think that the political vision presented in a propaganda film from a century ago should be the deciding factor in this year’s primaries, consider this: Bolshevism on Trial was adapted from Thomas Dixon Jr.’s book Comrades: A Story of Social Adventure in California. Normally, a novel from a long-dead white supremacist would be a strange place to define the ideological boundaries of a 21st century left-wing political party, but Dixon also wrote The Clansman, the book that became The Birth of a Nation and was responsible for the rebirth of the Ku Klux Klan and an ensuing wave of racially-motivated murder, terrorism, and misery. Whatever else you can say about the man personally—and you can say plenty, as long as you aren’t drawing any conclusions from those things—it’s hard to argue that Dixon didn’t instinctively understand the character of the American people. Why would we ever aim for anything better?

stickdog99
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Feb 23, 2020 12:33 pm

That is a really fine piece of writing, walking a good line between satire and commentary, and I appreciate learning about the 1919 film Bolshevism On Trial (although the title at the start of this version on Youtube appears as Shattered Dreams) written by Dixon, author of The Clansman and thus the creator of Birth of a Nation, no less.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Sun Feb 23, 2020 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby RocketMan » Sun Feb 23, 2020 5:05 pm

liminalOyster » Sun Feb 23, 2020 4:29 am wrote:Nevada down and almost surely by what even Nate Silver calls a "large" margin. It's a good day, again.


I am somewhat nonplussed and weirded out that despite the visible and overt pre-voting skulduggery (those fucking NDAs for the volunteers, fuuuuuck) it went quite smoothly and in an uncontested manner.

I wonder if Bernie's campaign checkmated the DNC behind the scenes by setting up a parallel vote counting/election monitoring organization... :shrug:

Anyway, I hope they continue without letting up whatever they're doing, seems to be working. I have a feeling that Iowa could have been worse, MUCH worse, without the Sanders campaign monitoring structure in place in the caucus locations.
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby liminalOyster » Mon Feb 24, 2020 9:14 pm

Alan Dershowitz wrote:Let me announce here today, I have never ever in my life voted against a Democratic candidate for president [but] I will not vote for Bernie Sanders.


https://jewishjournal.com/news/los_ange ... o-and-bds/

Image

Image

Image
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby liminalOyster » Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:20 am

BREAKING: Lancet Study Author Says Sanders' Financing Plan Fully Covers Cost of Medicare for All
Author of landmark report declares "The options laid out by Sen. Sanders last night will more than cover" the cost of Medicare for All
David Sirota
9 hr
42
Bern Notice is a production of the Bernie 2020 campaign. Please forward this on to your friends and tell them to subscribe. The views expressed here are solely of the bylined author.

The author of a landmark health care study by Yale University researchers says Bernie’s financing plan fully pays for his Medicare for All initiative.

"The options laid out by Sen. Sanders last night will more than cover" the cost of Medicare for All, said Yale University’s Alison Galvani, one of the nation’s leading experts on health care financing, and the co-author of a comprehensive report published in The Lancet analyzing the prospect of single-payer health care in the United States.

Galvani touted the details of Sanders’ financing plan released last night at a CNN town hall.

The Washington Post reports that the Lancet study shows “national single-payer health-care system would save tens of thousands of lives each year — and hundreds of billions of dollars.” In all, the Post notes that the study shows a “single-payer health-care system would save more than 68,000 lives and $450 billion a year.”

The Lancet study follows a separate report from University of California researchers finding “a high degree of analytic consensus for the fiscal feasibility of a single-payer approach in the U.S.”

Specifically, the report reviewed single-payer cost analyses from groups “across the political spectrum” and found that “there is near-consensus in these analyses that single-payer would reduce health expenditures while providing high-quality insurance to all US residents.” The report notes that “the largest savings were predicted to come from simplified billing and lower drug costs.”

Bern after reading,

Sirota

https://bernie.substack.com/p/breaking- ... uthor-says
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

Postby Belligerent Savant » Wed Feb 26, 2020 5:08 pm

.

Media hysterics.

https://nypost.com/2020/02/26/israeli-f ... netanyahu/


Israeli foreign minister rips Sanders for ‘horrifying’ comments about Netanyahu

By Yaron Steinbuch

February 26, 2020

Israel’s foreign minister slammed Bernie Sanders on Wednesday for his “horrifying” comments about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Jerusalem during the latest Democratic debate.

The Vermont senator called Netanyahu a “reactionary racist” Tuesday night in South Carolina and said he’d consider reversing President Trump’s move of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to the capital city.

“We don’t intervene in the internal American electoral process, which is splendid,” Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz told Army Radio on Wednesday.

“Naturally, people who support Israel will not support someone who goes against these things,” he said, adding that Sanders had a long history of attacking the Jewish state.

Sanders, the Democratic front-runner, was asked during the debate whether he would move the US Embassy from Jerusalem.

He said “it’s something we need to take into consideration,” adding that he is “very proud of being Jewish” and that he “actually lived in Israel for several months,” referring to time volunteering in a kibbutz in the 1960s.

“Right now, sadly, tragically, Israel has a reactionary racist who is now running that country,” he said, referring to Netanyahu.

He added that if elected president, he would “absolutely protect the independence and security of Israel, but we cannot ignore the suffering of the Palestinians.

Sanders’ incendiary comments Tuesday night followed his recent announcement that he would not attend the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, conference.

Sanders assailed the pro-Israeli lobbying group for giving a platform to “leaders who express bigotry and oppose basic Palestinian rights,” according to The Hill.

With Post wires



Tell it like it is, Bern.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5576
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 155 guests