I bumped into this via the truly excellent:

The History of the World in Seven Cheap Things, by Raj Patel and Jason Moore
https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520299931/a-history-of-the-world-in-seven-cheap-things

A must-read, IMO.

https://viacampesina.org/en/

Well, two failures to add some new sites here. Must be in spam purgatory. Will try one from wikipedia, related to the previous failed attempts:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World-Ecology

Speaking of Nathan Robinson — I’m a big fan, and hope to read his new book on socialism as soon as local libraries open back up — he got the Wisconsin situation all wrong. The Dems actually tried to postpone the election, sighting the pandemic. The Dem governor (Evers) tried his best to do this, but was rebuffed by the GOP.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/04/04/coronavirus-wisconsin-legislature-stalls-move-postpone-election/2949675001/

The GOP wants desperately to purge the voter rolls of hundreds of thousands of likely Dem voters, and hoped to win a state Supreme Court election to make sure that happened, so they blocked efforts to postpone it.

Ironically, with the election going forward, the liberal challenger won, making it far less likely that the purge will go through. It still may. Cuz the GOP still has a slight majority there. But, apparently, one of their “conservative” judges is so far going against his own team and saying no to the purge.

Looking forward to the movie too.

Loved the book when I read it long ago. Reread it a coupla years back and it still held up for me. If memory serves, I read most of the series back in the day, though I stopped liking it, I think, once Paul’s son turned into a . . . for lack of a better word . . . monster. Then, again, if memory serves, Herbert passed away and his son continued the series?

I didn’t keep up with it after that.

(In short, I think I really liked the first three books.)

Might also be alone in kinda liking the first movie version. I suspect recent innovations in CGI, etc. will make it much easier to get the “worms” right. They did look kinda cheesy, as the kids used to say. But I thought the casting was mostly spot on.

Thanks for the movie pics, ZN.

I’m constantly puzzled by the amount of time devoted to critiquing the Dems versus that spent on the GOP, especially given who actually holds power in America, and how that power is used. To me, as a leftist, it doesn’t add up, at all, and I think it creates a dangerously false sense of reality.

When I read or see progressive criticism of the Dems, I’m usually in agreement with it. Most of it strikes me as on the nose, and necessary to say, write, promulgate, etc. As in, it needs to be shouted from the rooftops. As Nathan Robinson mentions above, it’s wrong that some want to silence it. Let the sunshine in!!

But all too much of it also leaves out the GOP, and all too often entirely. It seems to forget that Trump is the president, the GOP has the Senate, the Supreme Court, and controls most of the states. It seems to forget that our daily life is filled with Trump/GOP scandals, power grabs, grifting, cons, endless lies, and we learn daily about these things in specific, concrete terms, though generally, unfortunately, not from those “progressive” sources.

If Americans watched nothing but, say, The Rising and a few other lefty sources on Youtube, they couldn’t help but think of the Dems as evil beyond redemption, leaving the GOP alone as the political answer — if for no other reason than they’re not talked about. That would be the “logical” deduction to make.

“They really make a great case against the Dems! They don’t say a word about Trump and the GOP, so they must love them!!”

Yeah, I know. Every now and then they’ll mention them and make some sort of obligatory comment. But with the proportion of heavy critique being so overwhelmingly one-sided, what is the the logical deduction to make from that for their audience?

In short, as a leftist, bringing a leftist critique against some leftist critiques, I want to see Sunshine bearing down on both parties (and the system that supports them), and for the relative power arrangements to factor in as well. Who holds the power, and what do they do with it? Judging from some of these sources, one would think the Dems are all alone in DC.

zn wrote:

Really remarkable how much a few replacement-level reactionary rich dudes and President Wario have done to undermine the few remaining things about this country that still work. Just need to doff the cap to these indefatigably wrong divorce aficionados.

— David Roth (@david_j_roth)/blockquote>

This has been a Republican/Right Wing dream for decades. They’ve tried to kill off and privatize the Post Office forever. It has the biggest union in government, and it’s the only department — as far as I know — tasked with pre-funding its pension plan, 75 years into the future. Death by a thousand cut now appears to be nearing its final goal. This will hurt all of us, and increase our cost of living.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/11/post-office-bailout-trump/

Quick follow up:

This part really, really surprises me. Dore should know better.

No one can believe a word Trump says. No one should trust a word he says. No president has ever come remotely close to him in mendacity or spin. He’s the all-time champion liar, huckster, conman, and he’s been that way his entire adult life.

Logically, Dore should be looking at Trump’s deeds, and the GOP’s deeds. What have they done, not what they say.

There is zero evidence that Trump or the GOP would ever, ever allow a non-profit, public sector health care program. Again, they’ve done everything they can to crush any attempt in the cradle. All of their actions tell us they want the opposite of that. They want America to be as fully for-profit and privatized as is legally and politically possible.

Deeds, not words.

Boiled down a bit more:

Since we start out with a capitalist rigged duopoly, which prevents actual democracy from happening, the next president will be a Dem or a Republican, obviously . . . So if voters go (from there) on policy agendas and competence, this would be the breakdown:

The 99% would vote overwhelmingly for the Dem
The 1% would vote overwhelmingly for Trump.

But, since most Americans vote for their team (Blue or Red), regardless, and “personality” over policy if they need other rationales . . . all bets are off this time. Cuz, really, neither candidate is “electable,” if we make it about the person in question, rather than Team Blue or Team Red.

Just my two cents.

(Too late for edit of previous post. So, that would be “accept.”)

Hope all is well, everyone.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by Billy_T.

waterfield wrote:

Zooey wrote:

Well…see…that’s fine. I am fine with his leadership in this crisis. His personality doesn’t mean much to me, but I prefer his bedside manner to Trump’s.

He wants to cut the state budget on the backs of poor people, though. So…he’s a non-starter for me because that’s something I will never compromise on.

Zooey: I’m unclear what your writing. Are you saying that in order for the Governor to cut the budget he focused solely on programs to assist the poor and cut funds for these ?. If so I am unaware of that. If OTOH, in order to cut the budget he cut funds across the board that obviously would have a greater impact on the poor-especially if it touched on medicaid. But that will always be true of any across the board budget cut -which is entirely different than saying we need to cut the budget so lets focus on medicaid.

I know you asked Zooey, and not moi . . . but I’ll throw in my two cents. Cuomo has long been known for his moderate Republicanism (in Dem clothes), fighting progressives at nearly every turn, often going as far as preventing Dems from majority control of the New York legislature when he was able. He’s basically what passes for “liberal” these days . . . which is to say, a “Woke” Conservative. Terrible on class issues, solid on virtue signaling.

Yes, he’s been a very good public face on this issue. Head and shoulders above Trump. It’s not close. Who knows what’s been happening behind the scenes, but he’s definitely outshone Trump by a thousand klieg lights as far as public leadership.

But as a governor overall? He’s a Dem neoliberal, which means the “soft” kind to the Republicans’ “hard” neoliberalism. So he pushes for tax cuts for the rich and business, deregulates when he can, privatizes when he can, etc.

As for slashing the budget. When you push for those endless tax cuts, you get to claim you have to make those budget cuts. So it really doesn’t matter if they’re across the board or not — and they never are. They always mean slashing programs the poor, the working class, and part of the middle class rely upon . . . in order to fund those tax cuts. But from what I’ve read, he’s focused more on safety net (and Higher Ed) stuff like Medicaid, etc.

As Andrew O’Herir says in this Salon article, he’s not our friend.

https://www.salon.com/2020/04/05/andrew-cuomos-not-your-boyfriend–and-joe-bidens-definitely-not-your-dad/

Andrew Cuomo’s not your boyfriend — and Joe Biden’s definitely not your dad
Liberal derangement and quarantine madness have made New York’s governor a sex-god celebrity. Can’t we do better?

I also wonder sometimes at what strikes me as greater leftist anger toward the Dems than the GOP. I understand a good bit of this, but not all. It’s likely the sense that the Dems should be championing at least some of the thing we leftists want, but most often don’t. We know the GOP won’t, so, subconsciously, perhaps, we let them off the hook. We feel betrayed by the Dems. We just take it for granted that the GOP does what it does. So leftist anger is often more focused on the Dems, etc.

Kinda sorta almost like this:

The Rams draft DE Smith in Round One. He never plays up to his draft-spot or his hype, but he’s a decent starter, and relatively productive overall.

The Rams draft DE Jones in Round Six. He outplays his draft-spot but he’s not as productive as Smith — in any phase of the game. All too many fans bash Smith endlessly, and call for him to be cut and replaced by Jones. They aren’t critical of Jones at all, really, even though Smith has outplayed him consistently. Smith just hasn’t lived up to his spot or hype.

Oh, and a shout out and special thanks to all those in the Healing professions, including Rescue, First Responders, etc. You guys are true heroes.

A thousand thanks!!

Looks like most of us here are at risk, in one way or another, and/or have family and friends in rough straits. I wish you and yours great health, safety and longevity. Be well and wash your hands!!

Not saying anything new here, of course, but difficult times can bring out the best in us, and I think it does for most people. Not all. But most. I’ve noticed for a long time now, for instance, that cancer patients routinely try to make desk personnel and nursing staff laugh, as we make light of our own conditions. I tend to do what some now call “Dad jokes,” because I’ve never been good at repeating better known comedy stuff. Bad puns, more often than not. Since we basically have captive audiences, they don’t throw tomatoes at us, though they might, if they had them on hand.

In the end, there are no good answers, I think I believe. Only love and laughter, which bring us hope. Am reading a good bio of Montaigne right now, by Sarah Bakewell, that has me pondering these things even more than usual:

Books

How to Live. (I loved her At the Existentialist Cafe, so grabbed this one when I saw it on the E-book list in Libby. Makes me want to read his complete essays, which I have on my bookshelf, but have never tackled in full.)

He was greatly influenced by the Ancients, especially the Stoics, Skeptics and Epicureans. Eudaimonia was their goal, and they sought Ataraxia to get there.

A quote I found on the Internet. It’s really not as maudlin or morbid as it may sound initially:

If you don’t know how to die, don’t worry; Nature will tell you what to do on the spot, fully and adequately. She will do this job perfectly for you; don’t bother your head about it.

Zooey wrote:

Additional thought…what with the new push for people to go back to work….

THAT’S why they wanted the stimulus to be low. So they can say they did it, but when the “offer” to let people “decide” if they want to go back to work…there is really no choice.

They want everybody going back to fucking work while they hang out in their vacation homes.

And that’s always been the essence of capitalism. Michael Perelman’s The Invention of Capitalism is filled to the brim with direct quotes from political economists back in the day, especially Smith and company in the 18th and 19th centuries, plus a philosophe or two or three. It’s amazing how often they tried to work-shame “the peasants” into the factories, resorting to the bible constantly. Or that work-shaming would come directly from the pulpit, with the urging of the rising capitalist class.

And they’d attack it from the other side, too, saying if someone didn’t “improve” their land — make a profit from it — they really didn’t have any “right” to keep it. Locke was especially monstrous on that count. This gave cover to the mass theft of indigenous people’s lands all over the world, and the further “enclosure” of the Commons in the so-called civilized world.

“Not making profits off your lands? You can’t claim that it’s yours then. Sorry, but we own it now, cuz we’re virtuous, hard-working Christians and we will ‘improve’ it unlike you heathens.”