[Xmca-l] Re: Why I Won't Vote for Sanders

[Christopher Schuck]

Everyone: my email has been hacked and is possibly circulating a fake
Google Link to you all; please do not click on it!! I am terribly
sorry....Should have joined this group next week not last week.

Chris Schuck

On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Annalisa Aguilar <annalisa@unm.edu> wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> Well! I see we have a lively talk here going on the election, but I
> thought one of the most frightening aspects to be concerned about was
> trump. Vera and Helena had asked what can we do about that. We have to look
> at the fact as Michael has pointed out, that we are a racist and misogynist
> society. Thinking about this thread, I also believe that we are a
> slave-oriented society because of the neoliberal forces that have taken
> over so many aspects of American society. But it's worldwide, it's not just
> in the US.
>
> To address David HK's post, I don't think it is about measure of wealth
> anymore. For people as wealthy as we see today, the next progression is a
> desire for power. Think trump. Think Citizens United. This is why having so
> much concentrated wealth is dangerous to democratic society. It should be
> illegal to have such enormous wealth. Greed should be against the law in
> the same way murder is. That would never make it to legislation, though.
>
> So I say slave-oriented society, not to be inflammatory on this list, but
> to say that capitalism produces that kind of social fabric. Marx seems to
> have believed that the creation of such abysmal conditions would cause a
> revolution, but it seems that when a frog is inured to boiling in water it
> doesn't jump out. People who become used to constraints upon freedom get
> used to that. On the other hand there are other dynamics at play, so I
> remain hopeful. I don't think history is teleological, but circular,
> contiguous, and ripple-like.
>
> It would be great to see a democratic government that moves away from a
> two-party system, but I don't think presidential elections is the time to
> try to make that happen. I think it should happen legislatively, though I'm
> not sure how. The game is rigged to try to run a parliamentary-like
> election by voting for little parties. That's how we got W for president
> and landed in two wars and stoked the fires of fear and terror. What might
> be more effective is the creation of factions inside the two-system to
> break the parties up from the inside. However, I'm not a political
> scientist, in case any one is curious.
>
> I agree with Michael that we can't make progress in the US until we face
> our demons. You can't be for freedom and democracy unless you are for
> freedom and democracy for everyone. That has been the American problem all
> along from its inception.
>
> As far as Bernie goes, I do think it is a pity that he can't advocate for
> the poor without making anti-women statements that his opponent is
> unqualified. Hillary has done a lot for women and children and for a long
> long time. So that was an absolutely wrong thing to say, especially to
> women voters, which is 50% of voters? I don't know what on earth Bernie has
> done to help the poor. Nor do I know what he's done for women. But he sure
> likes the Pope, who is against reproductive rights and women clergy.
> Furthermore, I see how black americans are voting with their feet and many
> of them are not in the Sanders camp. I wonder why that is. They must not
> feel it with him, and that is his own doing, no one else's. Given that he's
> for guns, do you think that might be a factor? Hmm...
>
> I've yet to hear Bernie to say what he has done (historically, not stump
> speeches) for the poor or for women or for minorities. I'd really like to
> know, and I'm surprised that he's been so quiet on these topics. Or maybe
> I'm just not listening well enough.
>
> Still... I'm glad he's campaigning because he has brought a lot of people
> to the political discussion who haven't felt a part of it. But then trump
> is bringing in a lot of people too, and those are actually the kind of
> people I'd rather not be part of the process. Not many people here have
> sounded out much on trump. I suspect we are completely in shock that this
> could even be happening. But it is.
>
> To Helena's last post, I agree with her that we can't be just talking
> about voting for candidates, but must consider how our communities are
> doing and what we are doing to make them more vibrant, verdant, and safe.
> How to connect and make the personal political for you? No matter who wins,
> the work still needs to be done from the bottom for those who are most
> vulnerable.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Annalisa
>
>
>
>
>