Dear Naomi Klein, please stop making my life difficult

by: Natasha Chart

Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 06:00


Last Friday I was in the Fresh Air Center for bloggers and new media at the COP15 summit in Copenhagen, organized by the TckTckTck campaign, and I got into an argument (you are not surprised, I know,) with Naomi Klein (okay, you are a little surprised, because it's Naomi Klein.)

I went up to Klein, thanked her for the Shock Doctrine and asked, with regard to her use of the term "reparations" in talking about climate aid to developing nations, if she knew what a damaging word that was to use in the US because it specifically called up the idea of reparations for slavery. (The word has become popular in some circles to mean getting wealthy nations to cough up a responsible share of adaptation and mitigation support and to cut emissions, also referred to more neutrally as "climate debt.") In particular, I asked her if she knew that it made it impossible for Obama to agree to do anything referred to in that way.

Really, it would be impossible for any American president. But for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who stopped to think about them at all, you can replace any instance of 'reparations' in any speech or text with 'Barack Obama can't say yes to this, nor can he ever once utter this word.'

Natasha Chart :: Dear Naomi Klein, please stop making my life difficult
Klein launched into a description of how the word made her feel, saying that it seemed appropriate because it connoted repair. I must have been looking at her really hard. She said maybe I should send a memo to the whole Global South telling them to stop using it, and wouldn't that be odd. She laughed. I said that they could say whatever they want to say, but if they want to ask the US for things, they can't use that word.

Klein then said I was trying to give Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh the right to tell her what to say, tell everyone what to say, and she didn't like it. "You Americans," she said, "want to hold us all to what's possible in DC, which is apparently nothing."

"You," Klein said, and I'm not sure if she meant 'you Americans' again or was referring to me, personally, "have such a limited sense of the possible ...[and] ... give up before you even try." She said she thought it was possible to reclaim the term and added that she'd gotten great responses to an article she wrote in Rolling Stone where she'd used it, and here our conversation was putting me in jeopardy of needing to go into a corner and bang my head repeatedly into the wall.

I told her that I supposed we were just going to have to disagree on this and turned to go.

Though if you didn't grow up in the US, 'reparations' is a thesaurus entry to you, so what do you care whether you have to look up another damn word to use? If you did grow up in the US, whether or not you're a Rolling Stone kind of person and are willing to overlook it, you know that the only way you could be more divisive would be to rename the climate movement 'reconstruction' and decide that we should all call ourselves 'carpetbaggers.' At which point, f*ck it, all future climate discussions might as well be carried out with live ammo between participants dressed in navy blue and medium gray clothing.

It isn't fair in the least to make this kind of 'you Americans' criticism like we're all the same. Only about a sixth of us vote for the winning presidential candidate and various Americans have made a number of innovative contributions to the global campaign for climate justice. One of them, Bill McKibben, was sitting right next to you that evening, and I got the impression that you two know each other.

It's further unfair suggest my aspirations are low or say I give up too easily. For example, I'm trying to get my government to give me healthcare without declaring my uterus the property of the US' most conservative shamans. I'm also trying to figure out how to get rid of the filibuster, rebuild something like a functioning civil society, overcome the undermining of the progressive movement from a Democratic White House, and, oh yeah, trying to get Congress and more of the public to give a sh*t about the biggest existential crisis humanity has ever faced while in the middle of a gale of fossil energy propaganda.

I'm not trying to do these things by myself obviously, but I don't want to also refight the godsdamn Civil War right now, seeing as how I and my colleagues are already kind of busy getting our @sses kicked, you know?

So, Ms. Klein, please realize that there are people in the US who agree with you on many, many things. We aren't a monolith united behind all the doings of our government. Yet every time you say that word, you make our work harder and push us farther away from the future we would like to create for our country. Every time you encourage others who are serious about combatting climate change to use it, you do them and their cause a disservice.

If you really want to help though, I have an idea. Why not show us how it's done and fix that little tar sands problem you've got up there in the Great White North? It would be so inspring and we all really need a win right now a lot more than we need yet another uphill battle. For someone with such a vast sense of the possible as yourself, surely it'd be no trouble.

Love,
This American


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Agree with much of Klein's work, but (4.00 / 3)
am also really tired of arrogance that makes her and others so comfortable saying "you Americans" with that edge to their voice. Certainly eight years of the Bush/Cheney cabal gives some license, she'd get no argument from me there. Still, as someone for whom words and their meaning is her living, I would expect a more serious examination of the history of the word "reparations" in the context of making demands that largely depend on acceptance by 'us Americans.'

Good for you for pointing out the fly in the ointment.  


But Rolling Stone readers agree. (0.00 / 0)
Case closed.   :)

(Sweet fair-minded piece, NC.  Maybe she'll come around.)

USA: 1950 to 2010


[ Parent ]
She may also support reparations for slavery. . . (0.00 / 0)
 . . . and the historical crimes of imperialism in general.  

It's a pretty solid position: that the planet's social and biospheric crises are the by-products of 500 years of short-sighted, ill-informed, and often brutal techniques of wealth creation pursued as a cultural tradition by a relatively small , elite cohort.

It seems like no matter what the "climate debt/slavery debt" is called (and I think is difficult to parse them when one "follows the money" from 17th Cent trade in the Atlantic basin), repayment, or even discussion about it, will be resisted ardently, particularly by large private interests in America.

Unfortunately, American political conditions kinda don't let us ever stop re-fighting the Civil War.  

Bummer.

USA: 1950 to 2010


[ Parent ]
Well, she is right in the bigger picture, (4.00 / 3)
"Americans" don't do much, give up without a fight, and think the world ought to revolve around us when we can't even get our own government to vote for us.   They treat Americans like fodder and somehow that makes us smarter than the rest of the people on the globe. Show me any instance where this country has said or done anything to indiciate it might be able to learn a lesson or two from any other country on the planet.  Health care?  street drugs?  income disparity?  vacation/sick days/maternity leave?   We are always slinging mud at [socialists] them.  

Oth, you are right.  Obama cannot use the word "reparation".  Unless, of course, Goldman Sachs or some other corporation decides he must.  Then all bets are off.  

Too bad.  It must have been a disappointing encounter for you.  


Not really (4.00 / 4)
After all, I got to meet Naomi Klein, whom I rather admire. I'm glad I got to thank her for the Shock Doctrine, which was an incredibly important work.

But I'm also someone who's working to change the society I live in, and learn lessons from other people, and it isn't fair to talk to me as if I don't see these things or don't care about them; not even if I admire you, because I don't want to be anyone's toady. So I'm also glad I held my ground and didn't simper off like a fan girl.


[ Parent ]
I agree. I bet it was good to meet her, and (0.00 / 0)
I bet she's tough.  I mean that as compliment btw.  

[ Parent ]
She is tough (0.00 / 0)
And I also mean that as a compliment.

[ Parent ]
True, But (4.00 / 4)
whatever new word we use, they're going to just demonize it in about 10 seconds anyway.

So you better chose a word you don't much like.

The real problem, IMHO, is not so much that "you Americans" give up too easily, but that us progressives aren't playing a big enough game.  And the game here would be controlling the public discourse.

Klein ought to realize that, as she's the one writing for Rolling Stone, and while that's a great venue--William Greider did some of his best work there--it's not the elite press, much less network TV, and writing something there, even the best something there, only gets something into circulation, it does not make something into a dominant idea.


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


How do we play a bigger game? (4.00 / 2)
That's always the question among progressives and has been for several years now.  One thing we have to admit is that we've made a lot of progress (no pun intended) but not necessarily on this issue.  

On the health care issue, we're losing the battle in the short term, but you can't say that our perspective didn't make it out there into the big media show.  We just got steamrolled because the party we identify with decided to, well, steamroll us.


[ Parent ]
Instead of 'reparations' we use 'tithe.' (4.00 / 4)
Tithing is good, right? Or 'stewardship support.'

[ Parent ]
How about 'Damages'? (4.00 / 2)
That's the legal term for what I pay when you sue me for the stuff I broke.

USA: 1950 to 2010

[ Parent ]
Yeah, but 'damages' requires a sense of (0.00 / 0)
culpability. It's not our fault that people in developing nations didn't have the foresight to be born in the US.

Which I guess is actually my deeper point (pretending, for a moment, that I had one). Yeah, the word 'reparations' is obviously politically toxic. But what's equally toxic is the suggestion that the US is at fault.

It's like Lakoff never said, conservatives see the country as permissive parents see their child. If another parent asks them to stop little Johnny from picking on the other kids, they say, 'Well, I'm sure the other kids started it,' or 'I don't believe in interfering with little Johnny sense of self-expression.'

Liberals, on the other hand, believe in strict parenting. We love our kid to distraction, and that's the reason we try never to be blind to its faults. So we can teach it to act better in the future. So we'll grab it by the arm and give it a stern talking-to, if necessary.

The word 'reparations' just scratches the surface.


[ Parent ]
Exactly (0.00 / 0)


Figuring out how to be a progressive college graduate transplant to Ohio:  http://citizenobie.wordpress.com/

[ Parent ]
Oh, you hate America! (0.00 / 0)
The problem is one of substance. Playing with vocabulary won't get at that.

Full Court Press!  http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

[ Parent ]
"Tithe" Is An Excellent Suggestion (4.00 / 6)
I'd just love to see the right work itself into a frenzy attacking tithes.

There's not enough popcorn in the world for that one.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Easy! (0.00 / 0)
"The godless left is taking money meant for God and redirecting it to a UN one-world government.  END TIMES!!!!"

The posters would say "I ONLY TITHE TO GOD."

Fits into their existing attack on climate change as a global government conspiracy.

Would still be hilarious though!!


[ Parent ]
Ok, I get you... (0.00 / 0)
How about, "tip".

USA: 1950 to 2010

[ Parent ]
She's from Toronto, what do you expect? (4.00 / 1)
Canadians identify themselves by their superiority to Americans.

Torontonians have that attitude in spades.


Canadians identify as Americans with sanity, healthcare and a dislike of of guns. (4.00 / 1)
I cannot disagree with them, and if you have ever seen a Canadian comedian, their humour and general attitude toward life is self-deprecation. (And you have seen Canadian comedians, let me assure you.)

Mike Meyers, for example, does not make fun of others so much as he lampoons himself and his own. "Aren't I, we, ridiculous?"

The great mass of America does have a tendency toward a "center of the world" point of view, on the left, the centre and on the right. But it is matched in other countries by their own version of "our team", though of course, not being Americans, it is paltry in comparison.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Canadians Don't Dislike Guns (4.00 / 1)
IIRC, Michael Moore did a good job of refuting this in Bowling For Columbine. Their gun-ownership rate is quite similar to ours.

They just don't have a love affair with them.

p.s. Jews also have a penchant for self-deprecating humor.  Less so when we play to goy audiences.  I somewhat doubt that's still true in Israel, though.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Canadians want gun registration, gun laws to remove guns from cities, strong laws to stop American guns from crossing the border. (4.00 / 1)
The pro-gun voters, who want America-like laws, are a distinct unrespected minority, and they often vote all across the map. The NRA is considered in Canada, admittedly only by the great majority and not by all, as another f----king crazy "social pimple" of a sick society, something that is evidence of lunacy.

Canadians are even more self deprecating when preforming only to Canadians, unless talking about hockey, when, giggling, they wonder why anyone else in the world plays.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
yes, we do (4.00 / 1)
IIRC, Michael Moore did a good job of refuting this in Bowling For Columbine. Their gun-ownership rate is quite similar to ours.

That sounds preposterous. I don't have the statistics on hand, but that just doesn't sound right. The general ethos is anti-gun, unless it's for hunting. Our handgun ownership must be pretty low for example.

yeah, I'm Canadian.  


[ Parent ]
It is not preposterous. (4.00 / 2)
Canada
Low Range Estimates

= 2,400,000 firearms owners

= 7,200,000 firearms
Medium Range Estimates

= 3,100,000 firearms owners

= 9,000,000 firearms
High Range Estimates

=   3,800,000 firearms owners

= 11,000,000 firearms

http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
preposterous, i says (4.00 / 1)
Regarding ownership:

The U.S. population is about 10 times that of Canada, but the estimated number of privately owned firearms is 25 times higher in the United States than in Canada.

Regarding opinions about guns:

In considering whether the general public should be allowed to own guns, Americans and Canadians are likely to hold opposite viewpoints. Gallup recently asked Americans, "Do you think there should or should not be a law that would ban the possession of handguns, except by the police and other authorized persons?" Almost two-thirds (65%) said no while about a third (32%) said yes*. Last year, Canadians were asked, "For each of the following groups, please indicate whether or not you think they should be allowed, by law, to own a gun: the general public." A majority of Canadians (63%) said they do not believe that the general public should be allowed to own a gun, while 36% said it should**.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/738...

And this is from ten years ago (your stats are from 15 years ago, btw). Opinions have only become more negative.  


[ Parent ]
Well, I'm An American (4.00 / 2)
And I've had very little physical exposure to guns in my life, even when I've lived in high-crime areas.  Guns are far more present in the culture (movies, tv, songs, stories, etc.) than they are physically present.

I can readily imagine that a Canadian with similar limited physical experience of guns, and most of the cultural experience identified with US culture would think it preposterous that both countries have similar gun-ownership rates.  And yet, that's exactly what I would expect with similar gun-ownership rates, but different cultures.

The fact is, lots of people have guns that they never use.  And a small fraction of the population has lots of guns and use them quite a bit.  The former group accounts for high rates of gun ownerhsip, while the later group accounts more for the US's peculiar gun culture.  What I'm suggesting is that Canada & the US differ primarily with respect to the later group, rather than the former.  Canada also probably has as many, if not more, hunters who own and use guns per capita as the US.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
As nightfall does not come all at once (0.00 / 0)
"As nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.""- William O. Douglas

Where the U.S. is concerned (0.00 / 0)
reparations generally applies to slavery, North American Indian genocides and land grabs, Mexican War land grabs, use of nuclear weapons to kill Japanese civilians.

Genocide, slavery and mass murder are the big ones though.

That's what happens when you're an empire. Everybody you annihilated in your mad ascendancy to world domination eventually wants you to apologize for all the evil you did by first apologizing and then giving them some of the stuff back that you stole.

I can't take Naomi's "You Americans" very seriously. It IS very Monty Pythonesque, don't you think?

French Soldier: I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough wiper. I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

Sir Galahad: Is there someone else up there we can talk to?

French Soldier: No, now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.  


internment (4.00 / 1)
Reparations were paid IIRC for internment of Japanese Americans during WW II.

[ Parent ]
It's About Recognizing The World As It Is (4.00 / 1)
And changing it strategically.

I'm taking devil's advocate here, because I deplore the lack of climate responsibility in American civil discourse.

I very much agree with Klein's recent Huffington Post attack on Obama (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-klein/for-obama-no-opportunity_b_399414.html).  Because clearly there were big opportunities to change the system that were just not taken because that's not what Obama envisions.

But for anyone who doesn't command that ludicrous degree of power and influence, it behooves us to placate where we can (by avoiding inflammatory language that doesn't do anything) and steal victories where we can (by doing things the other side either doesn't realize or is too slow to deal with, or where we display an overwhelming show of strength and assert ourselves).

Is 'reparations' worth fighting for rather than something else that produces the same effect?  At the end of the day, historical imbalances need to be addressed.  How do you do that strategically?

Figuring out how to be a progressive college graduate transplant to Ohio:  http://citizenobie.wordpress.com/


The political can be personal too apparently (4.00 / 1)
I like Naomi Klien a great deal, I like her thinking, her insights, her spirit, her point of view, her strength and commitment.

I like Natasha Chart a great deal, I like her thinking, her insights, her spirit, her point of view, her strength and commitment.



--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


YOU MUST CHOOSE!!* (4.00 / 2)
No complexity allowed!
Allegiance must be total!

[Insert: _________ throwing  _______ under the bus.]

*I call this poem, "Online Political Discussion in the Ought Not Aughts"

;)

USA: 1950 to 2010


[ Parent ]
(Clapping one hand) I have chosen to appreciate the impossible. (4.00 / 1)
(HoP trips, falls under bus.)

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Good thing you don't have to choose (4.00 / 1)
I mean, I like Naomi Klein a lot, she's pretty awesome. I'd be bummed if you'd decided not to like her just because she and I had a disagreement over her choice of words.

[ Parent ]
organize (0.00 / 0)
what Ms. Klein says

or writes

(or what you do either, for that matter)

is momentary.

We must organize.


wow, this seems like a really minor point from the outside (0.00 / 0)
do you guys really get your knickers in a twist when someone says "reparations"?

We (progressives) get our knickers in a twist (4.00 / 1)
when the neo-authoritarians are on the march and take in every rumor, pseudo-datum, and piece of conjecture as fuel for their loony.

Figuring out how to be a progressive college graduate transplant to Ohio:  http://citizenobie.wordpress.com/

[ Parent ]
It's exactly because it seems like a minor point from the outside (4.00 / 3)
That it would come in very handy if folks who think it's a minor point just sort of scoot on past.

It's hard for me to describe the level of crazy it activates, but like I've told people, look on youtube for the video taken of the people in line at the Sarah Palin rallies during the election. It just gives those people more ammunition, and I've got to tell you, they already have plenty of the literal kind.


[ Parent ]
Meaning (4.00 / 1)
You have to realize that the word "reparations" literally has different meaning and connotation in the U.S.  The word is taken.

I'm sure you can think of hundreds of examples where words have meanings well beyond their dictionary definition.  That is how language works.  Someone who didn't speak English well might think that "fuck" and "make love" mean the same thing, and could swap one term for the other without changing anything.  Of course, it doesn't work that way.


[ Parent ]
yes (0.00 / 0)
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

The day that Pres. Obama uses that word, there'd be no end to references of 40 acres and a mule.

As Faulkner said, "The past is never dead. It's not even past."

They call me Clem, Clem Guttata. Come visit wild, wonderful West Virginia Blue


[ Parent ]
The level of American arrogance here! (0.00 / 0)
She said maybe I should send a memo to the whole Global South telling them to stop using it, and wouldn't that be odd.

So you would have Klein running around telling reps of 3rd world countries to clean up their language for the delicate sensibilities of Americans.

I can understand why you wouldn't want to use the R word. But you would put Klein in an analogous position as yours, undermining her own credibility with the Global South for YOUR sake.

Full Court Press!  http://www.openleft.com/showDi...


Nonsense! (4.00 / 1)
First off, most of the global South doesn't use the word "reparations".  Most of the global South doesn't speak English.

But Natasha wasn't saying anything of the sort.  She was talking to or about the global South. She was talking about Naomi's use of the word, writing for a very different audience.

"Reparations" makes perfect sense for me.  But it doesn't mean that I'd use it in the sorts of contexts that Klein writes in.


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
What's the use? (0.00 / 0)
Even the word "linoleum" sets off the wing-nuts.

Full Court Press!  http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

[ Parent ]
Linoleum? (0.00 / 0)
"Innocence," Buffy, The Vampire Slayer, Season 2, Episode 14.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Whatever (4.00 / 5)
She's a brilliant writer who used at least three other ways to describe this in the course of our conversation. I didn't tell her to do anything. I told her that this word choice made it hard to get the US to agree to things.

She can go on using it if she likes, so can everyone else, I can't stop anyone and wouldn't try.

And personally, I don't even give a damn for my own sake. I know what they're asking for and I know what they mean, I consider the underlying request perfectly legitimate. In the course of industrializing, the developed nations used up so much atmospheric space, as they say, that now there isn't even room for them to follow our path to prosperity and we have the gall to be asking them to cut back. It's an outrageous situation.

I do get it. And I'm not even personally offended. But I've also spent a lot of time studying right wing politics in the US, grew up soaking in it, and my inside perspective is that this is a supremely ineffective way to make requests of the US. If people just want to yell at the US, ok. Say whatever you like. If they'd like to get us to go along with things, and keep wondering why that isn't working, this is their friend on the inside explaining a very straightforward way to polish the pitch.

Because see, I would like to win this battle someday. I'd like to keep warming controlled, I'd like to see technology transfer agreements go forward, I'd like poor countries to be meaningfully reimbursed for the services of their intact ecosystems with all due respect paid to rights of their indigenous populations. This, however, is not going to help us win it.

I remember a few years ago, hearing a story about a Japanese effort to launch an internet product and they'd paid a lot of money to license Woody the Woodpecker as their product mascot. And it wasn't until the week of the launch that an American finally reviewed their English-language materials and realized that the branding and product campaign was centered entirely on the slogan, "Woody, your internet pecker." The whole thing was cancelled.

I don't even know if that story is true, or if it was just another Silicon Valley urban legend of corporate over-exuberance, but it doesn't matter. The point stands as to how a lack of cultural context can make epic fails of well-intended efforts to communicate in another language.

Klein even speaks English, but she doesn't speak wingnut, and I do. And as someone who would like to be an effective ally inside this country to a world community that's struggling to make the planet decent and just, I'm saying that this word hurts my work and theirs, and it seems unlikely that they're as attached to this one particular term as all of that.

Why engage in a pointless side skirmish when there's so much else to do? This is what I'm asking: please don't create a distraction that you won't even see coming.


[ Parent ]
Nice explication. (0.00 / 0)
Although, and I mean although, there does need to be an expansion of the "allowed" ideological terrain. One of the direct goals of the control of the idea'o'sphere, (as Paul R. discusses when talking about Gramscian hegemony) is the narrowing of the space within which to discuss both our predicament, and the road out. We are defending a shrinking territory of ideas.

The right has no boundaries, Buchanan holds forth in the most respected newsrooms (ha) with a point of view and ideas that can only be matched historically by the marching orders used during for the rounding up of Jews. The left asks for liberalism.

"Allowed discussions" run from center-right, to far right.

I agree with your points, but I want our territory back.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
Not hard to understand (4.00 / 1)
Everyone thought George Bush was an idiot when he used the word "crusade" in his speech promoting a "crusade against terrorists."  Same deal.  I writer should understand that.

Well, in particular, the writer who wrote "No Logo-" (0.00 / 0)
this should make complete sense to her. It certainly does to the people she was writing about there.

[ Parent ]
On top of which, the moral case for reparations is a poor one (0.00 / 0)
I think Yglesias was pointing this out the other day... that if we think of climate change as requiring "reparations," it would imply that the problem could be taken care of just by making payments to the developing world, after which we could wash our hands of the issue. But how would those funds be spent? To improve the lives of the poor - or to enrich the oligarchs that control the governments and economies in so many of those countries? Or what if those governments were really egalitarian, and used the funds to make economic investments - to build factories, and help their people buy things like cars and washing machines? You see the problem?

On the other hand, if we simply see the fight against global warming and helping the world's poorest people as straightforward moral responsibilities, that's all the reason we need to do the right thing. (Whether we actually do it is obviously another matter, but doing so wouldn't become any more likely just because we call it reparations.)


David Roberts not Yglesias? (0.00 / 0)
I think you were referring to this post.

I found it insightful: a bracing contrarian position against the more typically "progressive" stance that seems to be kind of about punishing "The West".

Also, he came down hard on McKibben's and Klein's off-the-cuff analysis of Obama's crazy day a COP15.  See their impromptu video at The Uptake, Dec 18.

I think he rightly challenged their assumption of O's role as some kind of puppetmaster.

USA: 1950 to 2010


[ Parent ]
Standard gobbledygook (0.00 / 0)
 Natasha Chart your sophistry is the standard gobbledygook. US of A liberals are failing to ask the right questions of their government.

President Obama has proven this to be true, that the government of The United Sates of America has nothing in common with the working people of this nation. And that the government of the people, by the people and for the people shall be restored only when we the people demand self-rule.

"Yes, we can" was Obama's ironic message to us to demand democracy through the vote. It seems now that we broken hearted missed that irony.

"Yes, we can"

People liberate themselves


Except that it seems intended to say soemone ios wrong, I have no idea what this (0.00 / 0)
posters politics are, left right or wacko. There is nothing here except we are fools.

Now I am not opposed to agreeing that I am fool, or that we are fools, but once that is done, I hope to hear why, and what can be done to produce wisdom, and where that wisdom might take us.

BVecause of that lack of any specificity, I presume, with no other evidence, that this simply a Dem basher.

Please poster, prove otherwise, as our foolishness is something we all want to repair.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox