The Meaning of Mittens: or, would you date a centrist

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House The Meaning of Mittens: or, would you date a centrist

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #127121
    Zooey
    Participant

    The Meaning of Mittens

    The Meaning of the Mittens: Five Possibilities
    The symbolic power of Bernie’s old pair of mittens was the work of the “us” in “not me, us.”

    Naomi Klein
    January 21 2021, 3:16 p.m.

    Pity the art directors, the stylists, and the stage managers. So much effort, taste, strategy, and money went into planning the semiotics of Joe Biden’s inauguration. The precise shade of Kamala Harris’s royal purple (screw you Vogue and your sloppy cover!). The selection of a smallish made-in-New-York brand to dress Jill Biden in ocean blue (way to support small businesses in a pandemic!). The sheer weight of Lady Gaga’s gold dove brooch (the “Hunger Games” fun of it!).

    And yet it was all for naught. Because in a sea of exquisitely matching face masks, Bernie Sanders’s ratty old mittens upstaged them all, instantly becoming the most discussed, delighted-in, and deranged visual message of the historic occasion. What should we make of this? Why did so many millions connect to whatever language the mittens were speaking? Was it pandemic delirium — all of us projecting our social isolation onto the most isolated person in the crowd? Was it sexism and racism, the Bernie Bros once again failing to acknowledge the subversive messages expressed in the fashion choices of glass-ceiling shattering women? Was it, as a friend just texted as I typed these words, “the world’s secret wish that Bernie was our president”?

    What is the meaning, the mittenology of it all?

    As with so much else related to this new administration, it’s too soon to tell. What follows are five possibilities.

    1. The Mittens as Reserved Judgment
    Much of the media focus has been on the mittens themselves: their 1970s cross-country ski anti-style. Their handmade-ness in a world of mass manufacturing. Their haphazardness and the fact that Bernie clearly didn’t spare a single brain cell deciding to wear them beyond “It’s cold. These are warm.”

    Just as important, however, is the posture of the mitten-wearer: the slouch, the crossed arms, the physical isolation from the crowd. The effect is not of a person left out at a party but rather, let’s be honest, of a person who has no interest in joining.

    At an event that was, above all, a show of cross-partisan unity, Bernie’s mittens stood in for everyone who has never been included in that elite-manufactured consensus.

    It wasn’t a boycott of the occasion itself; nobody wanted Trump out more than Bernie. But it expressed an unequivocal reservation of judgment about what was coming. Those crossed arms were the mittens saying, “Let’s see what you actually do and then we can talk about unity.”

    2. The Mittens as Warning
    But it was more than that. There was also, if you look closely, a woolen warning. The world went nuts for Bernie’s sullen inauguration posture because he was keeping alive the hope that there is still moral opposition to concentrated power and money in the United States — at a time when we need it more than ever.

    In that moment, Bernie’s crossed arms and sartorial dissonance seemed to be saying, “Do not cross us.” If, after all the hoopla, the Biden-Harris administration doesn’t deliver transformational action for a nation and a planet in agony, there will be consequences. And unlike during the Obama years, those consequences won’t take years — because the revolutionary spirit is already on the inside, and it’s wearing mittens.

    3. The Mittens as the Conscience of Liberals
    Bernie’s mittens have not only been an obsession among the senator’s base, those of us who had dearly hoped to see that slab of scratchy wool placed over a Bible earlier this week. They have also been a surprising hit among liberals — many of the same liberals who spent the primaries publicly gagging over the prospect of a President Sanders (so shouty, so pointy, so angry). And yet here they are forwarding mitten memes and sharing delightful stories about how the gloves were handmade by a teacher (crafty!) or that time Bernie lent them to a chilly health care worker (a “hand-warming” tale!).

    What’s up with that? Why is Bernie the dangerous socialist suddenly everyone’s lovable grandpa? On one level, it’s simple enough: Even as chair of the Senate Budget Committee, Sanders is far less of a threat to them than he was as a presidential candidate running on a promise to redistribute wealth and take the profit motive out of health care. Put another way, for the elite of the Democratic Party, it’s easy to love Bernie when he’s redistributing handmade mittens — so long as he keeps his mitts off their donors’ billions.

    In some ways, it’s even useful to tolerate a scruffy wing of the party precisely because the leadership is so cut off from its working class base. In that context, publicly embracing Bernie at this late date plays a role similar to the various pseudo-populist primary season stunts, like very publicly eating fried foods you hate or wearing regular people clothing.

    Which brings us to a related mitten meaning:

    4. The Mittens as Street Cred
    In liberal media outlets, inauguration week marked a giddy return to the Obama era of covering the first family as Davos-class celebrities. Does Biden’s Peloton bike present a security risk? Who dressed Jill Biden? Have you seen Kamala’s sister’s badass feminist sweatshirts? This strand of politician-as-lifestyle coverage had been largely dormant during the Trump era. Sure, the White House was filled with rich and thin people wearing and consuming expensive and desirable things. But they were proto-fascists and shameless grifters, so dwelling too much on Melania’s capes and Ivanka’s jewelry was a bad look.

    That’s all over now. And yet nagging PR concerns remain. We are, after all, in a global pandemic and hunger is soaring — even if the ultrarich have vastly increased their wealth during this period of mass death. Enter the mittens. It’s clear that some people in the upper reaches of the Democratic Party understand that if they are going to bask in a glamorous return to neoliberal “normal,” there needs to some nod to reality. The fact that Bernie was there, in his duffle coat and mittens and disposable mask, was quickly adopted as that nod.

    But don’t be fooled. Because there is another, more powerful meaning of the mittens.

    5. The Mittens as Movement Flex
    There are the mittens qua mittens. But there are also the mittens qua meme, a supercharging of the mittens’ symbolism that seemed to occur within seconds of their arrival on the scene. Before Gaga had sung the national anthem and before Biden had said “unity” nine times and “uniting” an additional three times, Bernie’s mittens were flying around the internet. Within hours he had been superimposed onto thousands of iconic images, spliced into films, and was trending everywhere things can trend.

    It is crucial to understand that this had nothing to do with anything Bernie did — other than be Bernie in the only way he knows how. Like so much of his historic 2020 primary campaign, the symbolic power of the mittens was the work of the “us” in “not me, us,” a decentralized movement of movements that represents thousands of grassroots organizations and tens of millions of voters, and that stands for policies supported by majorities of Democratic voters, according to many polls, but are still rejected by its elite. Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, student debt cancellation, free college, a wealth tax, and more.

    On Biden’s big day, the movement that represents those policies and those values made global meaning out of a pair of old mittens. It did because it could. It was a friendly little flex with a not-so-friendly undercurrent. We’re still here, it said. Ignore us, and we won’t sit nearly so quietly next time.

    #127127
    Cal
    Participant

    Maybe people were wrong about Biden–he seems like he is proposing some interesting ideas. He seems serious about climate change.

    And the child tax credit sounds impressive. Would this be the most important program to help poor people in the last 25 years?

    From the Washington Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/01/22/biden-childtaxcredit-stimulus/

    Under one draft of the plan being discussed, the IRS would be tasked with depositing checks worth $300 every month per child younger than 6, as well as $250 every month per child age 6 to 17. That would amount to $3,600 over the course of the year for young children, as well as $3,000 a year for older children, the officials said.

    Unlike with the stimulus checks, the Biden administration and Democratic lawmakers are hoping to make these child benefits a permanent government program that would continue in future years, according to three senior Democratic officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning. The current proposal calls only for the expanded benefit to be enacted for one year, after which Democrats widely hope political pressure will force Congress to extend them. The benefit would be phased out for affluent Americans, though the precise income level has not been determined.

    #127142
    wv
    Participant

    Maybe people were wrong about Biden–he seems like he is proposing some interesting ideas. He seems serious about climate change.

    And the child tax credit sounds impressive. Would this be the most important program to help poor people in the last 25 years?

    From the Washington Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/01/22/biden-childtaxcredit-stimulus/

    Under one draft of the plan being discussed, the IRS would be tasked with depositing checks worth $300 every month per child younger than 6, as well as $250 every month per child age 6 to 17. That would amount to $3,600 over the course of the year for young children, as well as $3,000 a year for older children, the officials said.

    Unlike with the stimulus checks, the Biden administration and Democratic lawmakers are hoping to make these child benefits a permanent government program that would continue in future years, according to three senior Democratic officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal planning. The current proposal calls only for the expanded benefit to be enacted for one year, after which Democrats widely hope political pressure will force Congress to extend them. The benefit would be phased out for affluent Americans, though the precise income level has not been determined.

    ==================

    Seems like just another corporate-DNC-democrat
    to me, Cal. Looks like Obama/Clinton to me.

    Massive, massive, massive, massive spending on
    the Military-Weapons-CIA-Empire.

    Very very little on the poor
    and vulnerable.

    w
    v

    #127149
    Cal
    Participant

    It is just crumbs compared to what we spend on our war fund. I think the WaPo article estimated that this program would cost 120 billion a year.

    But still. 300 bucks a month for a mom working at Wal-Mart for $12 / hour is a big deal.

    My wife recently got a raise that will give her an extra $500 per month and we regarded this as life changing.

    A few hundred bucks a month is a big deal. That can be the difference between renting a home and owning your own home.

    I don’t completely understand how the program will work, but it sounds like it might be used to target America’s working poor instead of the middle class. And I thought that was impressive.

    As bad as the Dems are, you can bet there will be NO Republicans who would support this type of program.

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 3 months ago by Cal.
    • This reply was modified 3 years, 3 months ago by Cal.
    #127154
    Billy_T
    Participant

    Trump went out of his way (for four/five years) to be absolutely sadistic to poor people, migrants, people of color in particular, and minorities and leftists in general. He was easily this earth’s biggest enemy, as far as American presidents go, historically. It’s not close.

    Biden won’t be that. He’s already, in just a few days, cancelled the Keystone XL pipeline, reversed Trump executive orders that had slashed food support for the hungry, etc, and has stopped or reversed dozens of orders Trump had implemented to kill the environment. He’s also surrounded himself with people who actually care about the environment and the poor.

    I’m very hopeful he’ll be just fine, relatively speaking. Oh, and he got us back into the WHO and the Paris Climate Treaty.

    Track all of Biden’s executive orders and actions as president

    All too many leftist pundits-with-audiences, IMO, will always be afraid to say anything good about the Dems, much less a centrist to conservadem like Biden. I’m no pundit, so I can give him kudos when he deserves them.

    (The usual caveat: We’re pretty much limited by existing realities in our comparisons. Major party versus major party. Which sucks. Would that we had real choices, as far as designing agendas and necessary fixes, etc., . . . true problem-solving, logical, rational common goals, ideals, etc.)

    #127156
    Billy_T
    Participant

    How Biden’s executive order could reduce hunger today — and long after the pandemic is over

    Excerpt:

    Opinion by
    Catherine Rampell
    Columnist
    Jan. 23, 2021 at 9:00 a.m. EST

    Stories of deep, pervasive hunger have been among the more disturbing undercurrents of the past year. Food lines stretch for miles. About 29 million U.S. adults — nearly 14 percent of the adult population — said last month that their household sometimes or often didn’t have enough to eat in the previous seven days, according to the Census Bureau’s most recent Household Pulse Survey. The shares are even higher among Blacks, Latinos and households with children.

    Congress has temporarily increased food assistance over the past year in response to the coronavirus pandemic, but the benefits are still not sufficient. Even with Congress’s temporary increases, for example, the average food stamp recipient still receives only $2.30 per person, per meal, according to estimates from Dottie Rosenbaum, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (Before the pandemic, the average benefit was closer to just $1.40 per person, per meal; without changes to law or administration policy, it would be slated to return to this level once the public health emergency ends.)

    On Friday, however, President Biden took some important steps toward relieving this hardship. As part of an executive order on economic relief, Biden set in motion three major changes to food assistance programs.

    #127157
    Billy_T
    Participant

    As mentioned by Cal and WV on this thread, it’s obviously not enough. But it is a major, positive departure from Trump’s presidency.

    I hope Biden and the Dems go Bigger, much further, and always keep the supreme urgency of the issues in mind.

    We’ll see.

    To borrow the oft-used phrase, I’m cautiously optimistic.

    #128256
    zn
    Moderator

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.