Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [hreg] Fwd: Green Party Animated Cartoon on Corporate Domination

Expand Messages
  • Robert Johnston
    Charles,   I was offended by the cartoon, but that didn’t stop me from looking and laughing at it, even if I thought it was inappropriate to post such
    Message 1 of 7 , Oct 29, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Charles,
       
      I was offended by the cartoon, but that didn’t stop me from looking and
      laughing at it, even if I thought it was inappropriate to post such
      political advertisements on the HREG listserv (unless you really do want
      to scare off those of us who are evil corporate techies and convert HREG
      into a Green outpost) and even though it was painful to watch in fits
      and starts thanks to my POTS internet connection (those evil,
      profit-centered telecoms haven’t seen fit to wire my neighborhood with
      broadband yet).  Though I disagreed with it, and with the posting, I
      don’t really mind the political dialogue, as I find it interesting to
      learn more about the Greens and how much I dislike their tactics and
      proposals.
       
      The good part for you, Charles, is that the cartoon does a pretty good
      job of listing the major issues that you Greens seem to care about. 
      Congratulations there.  The bad news is that it sounds like something
      Marx or Lenin could have proclaimed to the proletariat 90 years ago. 
      “Our society is ruled in large part by unelected, unaccountable
      corporate CEOs who basically control both major political parties and
      through them our government, the economy, our health care system, the
      mass media, our food supply, and much more. They would like to rule the
      world.”  The tone isn’t much different than the accusations made against
      the czars and Orthodox church, or preached to American and European
      Labor thereafter.  But in the end, both communists and czarists proved
      to be totalitarians, and not unlike your inability to differentiate
      between American political parties, citizens couldn’t see a lot of
      difference between the czar and Stalin, except that Stalin killed a
      whole lot more, and told starving peasants that they were in it for a
      good cause.
       
      I think that your cartoon is a great example of why the Greens can never
      be a major political party.  Many of us are decent people (we think) who
      work for decent corporations (we think) who don’t see the evil the
      cartoon describes, even in our CEO’s.  We recognize the cartoon for what
      it is, a gross caricature.  A severe distortion of reality.  So long as
      Greens insist on offending mainstream Americans and promoting class
      politics, one can assume they’ll never be very successful unless either
      they morph into something else, or the American economy goes into such a
      steep decline that the middle class gets wiped out and we really do end
      up with a severely distorted society.  If that happens, then as in the
      early 20th century, maybe Labor will again fall for the sweet talk of
      those who dispense criticism of highly organized human enterprises that
      successfully and efficiently produce products and services for society. 
      Such parties criticize but don’t suggest an effective alternative, and
      as in the last go-around, they are more likely to increase poverty and
      suffering than justice and happiness as their ads portray.  Communists
      countries worldwide demonstrated this for the better part of a century,
      and only as they let in CEO’s and corporations are they starting to see
      things turn around for the better, including more food, shelter,
      education, worker and political freedom, freedom of the press, human
      rights, lower pollution, etc.
       
      I think the problems your cartoon points out are in many cases real
      problems.  I just doubt the Greens have a clue how to go about solving
      them.  Universal health care drove Russian leaders to American doctors. 
      Job security works against the need for a reflexive and adaptive
      workforce, which is what enables a nation to make the changes it
      continuously needs to in order to develop and respond to new technology,
      opportunities, or problems.  Corporations and CEO’s can do bad things. 
      But these are human problems, not the fault of the entire enterprise
      structure.  Why pick on CEO’s for obscene salaries?  Why not pick on
      ball players or rock stars?  At least the corporations arguably produce
      more useful products and services.  Even the ones making all the bad
      press now, like Enron and Worldcom, provided billions of dollars worth
      of useful services to society.  Aren’t you Greens trying to exploit, in
      a manipulative fashion, current bad feelings towards such companies? 
      What are you saying that would appeal to an Enron or Worldcom employee? 
      Or to any other corporate hound who can put themselves in their shoes? 
      Yes, corporations have their problems, but corporations have also been
      part of the solution to human problems.  Let’s not throw the baby out
      with the bath water.
       
      Robert Johnston
    • chasmauch@aol.com
      Robert and HREGers, Thanks for the feedback. Clearly this is not a political listserv but politics are an unavoidable part of just about everything that
      Message 2 of 7 , Oct 29, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Robert and HREGers,
        Thanks for the feedback. Clearly this is not a political listserv but politics are an unavoidable part of just about everything that happens everywhere, including the way we get our energy. Of course we can call anyone who criticizes our corporate capitalist system a communist or whatever and complain that they do not offer a detailed alternative, but that is not what we need. If we can recover our democracy from the big money interests who have captured it, we can let the people answer that question through the democratic process which does not work at present because it is totally sold out to and beholden to big money, primarily from corporations and very wealthy persons.
        I will spare you all a detailed rebuttal to Robert's diatribe but hopefully everyone who is interested can see my response in tomorrow's Chronicle. I had a message from them on my telephone recorder when I got home this evening that they plan to run an op ed piece I submitted a few days ago, probably in tomorrow's Outlook section. So unless it gets scrubbed at the last minute you can read it in the paper or on their website. Then we can take it from there.
        Charlie
      • Robert Bruce Warburton
        The problem is that most people are not influenced by statistical arguments. Even if the statistical arguments involve legitimate statistics. One person who
        Message 3 of 7 , Oct 30, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          The problem is that most people are not influenced by statistical arguments.
          Even if the statistical arguments involve legitimate statistics. One person
          who was involved in a Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) scheme said, " facts are
          nice but stories sell." Look at the current governor's race. The candidates
          are appealing to emotion. The Texas Comptroller's race is another example.
          Instead of talking about the huge budget deficit that the state is facing,
          Carol Keaton Rylander is avoiding discussing the issue altogether.
          Politicians avoid discussing specifics as much as possible. The web site that
          Charles sent me shows candidates with no comment. How can people get
          information on where the candidates stand? It is not always a guarantee that
          spending a huge amount of money will ensure an election victory. I am sure
          that Perry will win. There is not a lot of love for Perry anymore, but the
          negative campaign has turned off a lot of people from voting for Sanchez.
          Unfortunately, our campaigns are going by the late Lee Atwater philosophy of
          increasing your opponents negatives.

          Robert Johnston wrote:

          > Charles,
          >
          > I was offended by the cartoon, but that didn’t stop me from looking and
          > laughing at it, even if I thought it was inappropriate to post such
          > political advertisements on the HREG listserv (unless you really do want
          > to scare off those of us who are evil corporate techies and convert HREG
          > into a Green outpost) and even though it was painful to watch in fits
          > and starts thanks to my POTS internet connection (those evil,
          > profit-centered telecoms haven’t seen fit to wire my neighborhood with
          > broadband yet). Though I disagreed with it, and with the posting, I
          > don’t really mind the political dialogue, as I find it interesting to
          > learn more about the Greens and how much I dislike their tactics and
          > proposals.
          >
          > The good part for you, Charles, is that the cartoon does a pretty good
          > job of listing the major issues that you Greens seem to care about.
          > Congratulations there. The bad news is that it sounds like something
          > Marx or Lenin could have proclaimed to the proletariat 90 years ago.
          > “Our society is ruled in large part by unelected, unaccountable
          > corporate CEOs who basically control both major political parties and
          > through them our government, the economy, our health care system, the
          > mass media, our food supply, and much more. They would like to rule the
          > world.” The tone isn’t much different than the accusations made against
          > the czars and Orthodox church, or preached to American and European
          > Labor thereafter. But in the end, both communists and czarists proved
          > to be totalitarians, and not unlike your inability to differentiate
          > between American political parties, citizens couldn’t see a lot of
          > difference between the czar and Stalin, except that Stalin killed a
          > whole lot more, and told starving peasants that they were in it for a
          > good cause.
          >
          > I think that your cartoon is a great example of why the Greens can never
          > be a major political party. Many of us are decent people (we think) who
          > work for decent corporations (we think) who don’t see the evil the
          > cartoon describes, even in our CEO’s. We recognize the cartoon for what
          > it is, a gross caricature. A severe distortion of reality. So long as
          > Greens insist on offending mainstream Americans and promoting class
          > politics, one can assume they’ll never be very successful unless either
          > they morph into something else, or the American economy goes into such a
          > steep decline that the middle class gets wiped out and we really do end
          > up with a severely distorted society. If that happens, then as in the
          > early 20th century, maybe Labor will again fall for the sweet talk of
          > those who dispense criticism of highly organized human enterprises that
          > successfully and efficiently produce products and services for society.
          > Such parties criticize but don’t suggest an effective alternative, and
          > as in the last go-around, they are more likely to increase poverty and
          > suffering than justice and happiness as their ads portray. Communists
          > countries worldwide demonstrated this for the better part of a century,
          > and only as they let in CEO’s and corporations are they starting to see
          > things turn around for the better, including more food, shelter,
          > education, worker and political freedom, freedom of the press, human
          > rights, lower pollution, etc.
          >
          > I think the problems your cartoon points out are in many cases real
          > problems. I just doubt the Greens have a clue how to go about solving
          > them. Universal health care drove Russian leaders to American doctors.
          > Job security works against the need for a reflexive and adaptive
          > workforce, which is what enables a nation to make the changes it
          > continuously needs to in order to develop and respond to new technology,
          > opportunities, or problems. Corporations and CEO’s can do bad things.
          > But these are human problems, not the fault of the entire enterprise
          > structure. Why pick on CEO’s for obscene salaries? Why not pick on
          > ball players or rock stars? At least the corporations arguably produce
          > more useful products and services. Even the ones making all the bad
          > press now, like Enron and Worldcom, provided billions of dollars worth
          > of useful services to society. Aren’t you Greens trying to exploit, in
          > a manipulative fashion, current bad feelings towards such companies?
          > What are you saying that would appeal to an Enron or Worldcom employee?
          > Or to any other corporate hound who can put themselves in their shoes?
          > Yes, corporations have their problems, but corporations have also been
          > part of the solution to human problems. Let’s not throw the baby out
          > with the bath water.
          >
          > Robert Johnston
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • Ryan McMullan
          One source that I ve used before is the League of Women Voters Voters Guide, which is a straight, non-partisan quiz of the candidates. They send each
          Message 4 of 7 , Oct 31, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            One source that I've used before is the League of Women Voters
            Voters Guide, which is a straight, non-partisan quiz of the
            candidates. They send each candidate three questions and post their
            responses. You can find it online at:
            http://www.lwvhouston.org/VG_Nov02/VGHC/hcvgframe.htm
            (they have one for Harris county and one for Fort Bend)
            http://www.lwvhouston.org/

            Not every candidate responds with a solid answer, but that can give you an
            indication, too. This has been the only way I've been able to find
            information on races like the Texas Court of Appeals or the Harris County
            Probate Court. Otherwise, I'm an informed voter and one might as well not
            vote if one does not have any clue who one is voting for (I'm not a big fan
            of straight party ticket). Anyway, it's a potential resource.

            Ryan

            At 10:24 AM 10/30/2002 -0600, you wrote:
            >The problem is that most people are not influenced by statistical arguments.
            >Even if the statistical arguments involve legitimate statistics. One person
            >who was involved in a Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) scheme said, " facts are
            >nice but stories sell." Look at the current governor's race. The candidates
            >are appealing to emotion. The Texas Comptroller's race is another example.
            >Instead of talking about the huge budget deficit that the state is facing,
            >Carol Keaton Rylander is avoiding discussing the issue altogether.
            >Politicians avoid discussing specifics as much as possible. The web site that
            >Charles sent me shows candidates with no comment. How can people get
            >information on where the candidates stand? It is not always a guarantee that
            >spending a huge amount of money will ensure an election victory. I am sure
            >that Perry will win. There is not a lot of love for Perry anymore, but the
            >negative campaign has turned off a lot of people from voting for Sanchez.
            >Unfortunately, our campaigns are going by the late Lee Atwater philosophy of
            >increasing your opponents negatives.
            >
            >Robert Johnston wrote:
            >
            > > Charles,
            > >
            > > I was offended by the cartoon, but that didn't stop me from looking and
            > > laughing at it, even if I thought it was inappropriate to post such
            > > political advertisements on the HREG listserv (unless you really do want
            > > to scare off those of us who are evil corporate techies and convert HREG
            > > into a Green outpost) and even though it was painful to watch in fits
            > > and starts thanks to my POTS internet connection (those evil,
            > > profit-centered telecoms haven't seen fit to wire my neighborhood with
            > > broadband yet). Though I disagreed with it, and with the posting, I
            > > don't really mind the political dialogue, as I find it interesting to
            > > learn more about the Greens and how much I dislike their tactics and
            > > proposals.
            > >
            > > The good part for you, Charles, is that the cartoon does a pretty good
            > > job of listing the major issues that you Greens seem to care about.
            > > Congratulations there. The bad news is that it sounds like something
            > > Marx or Lenin could have proclaimed to the proletariat 90 years ago.
            > > "Our society is ruled in large part by unelected, unaccountable
            > > corporate CEOs who basically control both major political parties and
            > > through them our government, the economy, our health care system, the
            > > mass media, our food supply, and much more. They would like to rule the
            > > world." The tone isn't much different than the accusations made against
            > > the czars and Orthodox church, or preached to American and European
            > > Labor thereafter. But in the end, both communists and czarists proved
            > > to be totalitarians, and not unlike your inability to differentiate
            > > between American political parties, citizens couldn't see a lot of
            > > difference between the czar and Stalin, except that Stalin killed a
            > > whole lot more, and told starving peasants that they were in it for a
            > > good cause.
            > >
            > > I think that your cartoon is a great example of why the Greens can never
            > > be a major political party. Many of us are decent people (we think) who
            > > work for decent corporations (we think) who don't see the evil the
            > > cartoon describes, even in our CEO's. We recognize the cartoon for what
            > > it is, a gross caricature. A severe distortion of reality. So long as
            > > Greens insist on offending mainstream Americans and promoting class
            > > politics, one can assume they'll never be very successful unless either
            > > they morph into something else, or the American economy goes into such a
            > > steep decline that the middle class gets wiped out and we really do end
            > > up with a severely distorted society. If that happens, then as in the
            > > early 20th century, maybe Labor will again fall for the sweet talk of
            > > those who dispense criticism of highly organized human enterprises that
            > > successfully and efficiently produce products and services for society.
            > > Such parties criticize but don't suggest an effective alternative, and
            > > as in the last go-around, they are more likely to increase poverty and
            > > suffering than justice and happiness as their ads portray. Communists
            > > countries worldwide demonstrated this for the better part of a century,
            > > and only as they let in CEO's and corporations are they starting to see
            > > things turn around for the better, including more food, shelter,
            > > education, worker and political freedom, freedom of the press, human
            > > rights, lower pollution, etc.
            > >
            > > I think the problems your cartoon points out are in many cases real
            > > problems. I just doubt the Greens have a clue how to go about solving
            > > them. Universal health care drove Russian leaders to American doctors.
            > > Job security works against the need for a reflexive and adaptive
            > > workforce, which is what enables a nation to make the changes it
            > > continuously needs to in order to develop and respond to new technology,
            > > opportunities, or problems. Corporations and CEO's can do bad things.
            > > But these are human problems, not the fault of the entire enterprise
            > > structure. Why pick on CEO's for obscene salaries? Why not pick on
            > > ball players or rock stars? At least the corporations arguably produce
            > > more useful products and services. Even the ones making all the bad
            > > press now, like Enron and Worldcom, provided billions of dollars worth
            > > of useful services to society. Aren't you Greens trying to exploit, in
            > > a manipulative fashion, current bad feelings towards such companies?
            > > What are you saying that would appeal to an Enron or Worldcom employee?
            > > Or to any other corporate hound who can put themselves in their shoes?
            > > Yes, corporations have their problems, but corporations have also been
            > > part of the solution to human problems. Let's not throw the baby out
            > > with the bath water.
            > >
            > > Robert Johnston
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • chasmauch@aol.com
            The voters guide put out by the League of Women Voters is far and away the best source of unbiased information about all candidates. Hard copies of the guides
            Message 5 of 7 , Oct 31, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              The voters guide put out by the League of Women Voters is far and away the best source of unbiased information about all candidates. Hard copies of the guides are available at most libraries and many other locations.
              On the internet just go to www.dnet.org and type in your zip code in the space indicated in the upper right hand corner. This will bring up all the races -- both statewide and local -- that will appear on the ballot for your area, with lots of information about each. It is an excellent resource.
              Charlie
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.