Hi Miriam,
Well, I must agree with you regarding those who provide you
assistance. The good Almighty did not send them along for you to
proselytize.
Cathy and I never bring up politics, religion or(blush) Sex when we
are working with clients. But if our client raises something of a
political nature, I have been known to enter into discussion with
them. But in such cases I do it with the utmost respect for the
beliefs of our client...even when they are way out in Right Field.
But mostly I am curious about why people think the things they think,
and believe that which they believe. So I'm usually not challenging
them, rather, encouraging them to explain their thoughts. Very often
such an approach helps the client to think deeper than normal, on a
particular topic. Can I say that this is "planting a seed"? Well,
most likely they will go right back to listening to Fox News, and soon
forget any momentary straying they may have done during our visit.
But on the other hand...
For years, as a child growing up in a Marxist home, I remember
confrontations that had begun as family gatherings at my Grandmother
Jarvis' home. She was a good Abraham Lincoln Republican and a Bible
Thumping Christian Lady. My dad and his sister Bonny, were Marxists.
They had that Misionary Ferver. As a small boy, I loved tucking
myself into a corner and taking in the fireworks. Later, Gramdmother
Jarvis had a huge framed portrait of President Eisenhower hanging
above her sofa. As Aunt Bonny entered, she would glance at that
portrait and say, "Still praying to that Bald Eagle?" And the
fireworks would begin. It was great training in what not to do. And
those meetings my folks dragged me to in the store front on Queen Ann
Hill. What a dull time for a young boy. I listened to people hammer
a point until the very point they were hammering on disappeared.
These people, like the Baptist preacher, were going to ram Karl Marx
down the throats of anyone who carelessly strayed in. The number of
converts was almost nonexistent.
And even during my early years in the National Federation of the
Blind, I behaved more like a fanatical Holy Roller, believing that we,
the NFB, had all the answers. I believe that the greatest lesson I
learned as I sat at the knee of Kenneth Jernigan, was that even if you
are a brilliant debator, and even if you could cut up your opponent
and serve him/her for dinner, you could not sway the deep beliefs of
those who thoughtfully disagreed with you.
In my later years I simply attempt to help folks think for themselves.
I honestly believe that the more people who do think for themselves,
the more people will begin to wake up and join together to find
solutions to the crushing oppression that is becoming the fate of the
Working Class.
Finally, back to my recent vacation. A year ago my nephew was far to
the Right in his thinking. We had some interesting conversations, as
well as an email from time to time. Was his voting for Johnson, the
Libertarian, a feather in my cap? Not at all. But it was
encouraging to note that neither he nor his wife voted for the
Trumpster. On our travels we also stopped in Sedona, Arizona, and
spent a day with my former boss. When I worked for her, she was a
middle of the road Democrat. I send her lots of my favorite stuff off
this list and off the internet. She says she reads it...mostly. And
she says that she has found herself sliding to the Left of
Center...and she blames Cathy and me.
We stayed with my kid sister in Sun City, Arizona. For most of her
adult life she had avoided politics. Her husband of 42 years was an
opinionated, non thinking conservative. It was His Way or His Way.
No room for any other opinions. But my sister and I exchange many
conversations via email. Now that she's been on her own since 1996,
she has begun believing that she has a brain and opinions of her own.
Big changes? Not at all. But encouraging people to question their
beliefs and to question those beliefs of the people they idolize, that
is the beginning of a mighty movement. The question is, will we win
our struggle before we become extinct?
Carl Jarvis
On 4/23/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'd say that if there are people in your family with whom you can have that
kind of calm, reasonable political discussion, that's wonderful and it's
also unusual. I'd like to believe that I imparted the same kind of values to
my children. Well, neither daughter votes Republican, but neither questions
what she sees on TV and neither is thinking about the welfare of all
Americans, let alone the welfare of all humankind when she hears about what
is going on. My daughter, the attorney, said last week, that she didn't see
why I should be worried about government surveillance since I'm not doing
anything wrong. And yesterday, when I mentioned the March For Science, she
said, "What?" She didn't even know it was happening. And the rule at family
gatherings, her rule, is that we don't discuss anything political so that
things will remain pleasant and cheerful. The people who assist me, the
person who takes me to medical appointments, the person who does my food
shopping and errands, and the person who cleans my apartment, are all white
working class, blue collar, female Long Islanders, and they are all right
wing politically. I know that one voted for Trump. One said she didn't like
him, but she thought he had a point about strong borders and illegal
immigration, and the third read one of Bill O'Reilly's books. So if I want
to keep this very dependable help that I have and desperately need, I'm not
going to attempt making my political change through conversations with them.
And if the socialist revolution for which you yearn, actually took place,
that is, by definition, a political revolution. Making the changes that we'd
like to see is, by definition politics. What you're talking about is the
fact that in the US, the political process has been captured by the 1%. But,
in fact, that's what nation states are all about. They exist to protect the
property of property owners and to further the business of business owners.
When all those Europeans went exploring, it was to find new natural
resources for the companies in their countries, to exploit. If the workers
of the world unite and throw off their chains, that's also politics.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 8:12 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: The White House Seems Excited to Shut Down
the Government
Bitch and complain may be one way of putting it, but Investigate and Explain
might be another way.
But first, yes, I do believe that politics is nothing but the wealthy
fighting among themselves for all they can grab away from one another.
If I ever said it was corrupt, I take it back. It's what our Ruling class
does, and what Ruling Classes as far back as I can read, do to jockey for
power positions.
We, on the outside, see what we think is corruption, and sometimes the
combatants accuse their adversaries of corruption. But it's all part of the
Game they are indulging in. While we go forward believing that some people
in high places are liars, cheaters, and corrupt, when the smoke settles,
they hug one another and dine in fine style, and yes, even sleep together.
But it goes even further than our not understanding their Game Rules.
We have never had a Game Plan. We have allowed ourselves to be led by our
noses, misdirected into supporting the ever changing whims of the Ruling
Class. Presently we are being goaded into believing our government is at
fault because it is too big and poorly managed. It needs to be smaller, we
are told. At the same time we learn that we need more military power. This
means bigger military. And what exactly is our military? Well, it truly is
big government on steroids. Except for the VA. We are told we need to cut
the fat and sloppiness out of the VA. The solution for everything except
our military, is to cut out the fat and make it leaner and more productive.
And many of us fall into line and nod our vacant heads up and down.
We need to shut down our TV's and put aside our Shot Jocks, and begin
thinking for ourselves.
If I, an average person, can do it, then millions of folks can do the same.
We have three children with spouses, three adult grandsons(two with
wives) and five younger grand children all living in a climate of
questioning. We have taught them to never take anything they read or hear
at face value. Question and investigate until you are satisfied that you
know what is being put before you, and until you have satisfied yourself as
to the position you hold.
Sure, it's an uphill struggle, but it's what must be done if we are going to
change the direction we are now being taken. It is as if we are under some
sort of a magic spell. And until we can kiss the ugly frog and see it turn
into a beautiful Fairy Godmother who will grant us all of our wishes, we
have only two choices. We can go along and hope enough spills from our
Master's plate, to keep us from ruin, or we can take in a few notches in our
belts and go forward educating our children, teaching them to be proud of
who they are and to rely on their own brains to reason the events around
them. Frankly, I don't think of myself as sitting back, simply because I am
no longer able to march in a picket line, or demonstrate in front of the
Quilcene City Hall...which does not exist. Instead, I question the folks
around me.
We just spent time with a nephew and his family in Merced, California.
He told me he votes Republican mostly, but could not bring himself to vote
for Trump. Instead, he voted for Johnson, the Libertarian. We had some
very direct discussions, but never became upset when one or the other of us
did not agree with the other. That was because we were discussing why the
government was behaving the way it is, and how we might impact some of the
actions that will effect our families. A Radical and a Moderate Republican,
agreeing on far more than we disagreed upon.
It's not a glamorous way of going about making changes, but remember the old
adage, Slow but Steady Wins the Race. And if we are truly steady, we have
the numbers, too.
Carl Jarvis
On 4/23/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I don't understand your post.
Just how do you think politics works? What is the mechanism that we,
the people, would use, to elect one of us? When has that ever happened
in a western country? And, in case you haven't noticed, when you read
about 'activists" or "organizers", you're reading about would-be
leaders who "educate" and "lead" which implies that the mass of people
don't do anything on their own. And once you've got leaders, you need
to have a culture of democracy and equality in your society, or else
you'll be back to what we have now or Stalinism.
And when you say that we don't have a dog in this fight, that it's
between the various factions of the ruling class, then you're doing
precisely what the majority of people do. You're saying that politics
is dirty and is all about money so all we can do is sit back and watch
the powers that be, fight it out. Well yes, you and I are old and
blind and we're not going to do a thing except bitch and complain. But
all those middle aged and young people, it's this attitude that
they're too busy living their lives and there's nothing they can do about
anything, which has gotten us here!
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 4:28 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: The White House Seems Excited to Shut
Down the Government
While I have no crystal ball to tell me how this budget fight will be
resolved, one thing is for certain. We, the Working Class Americans,
have no dog in that fight. No, I don't mean that the outcome won't be
devastating for us, but the fight is between the various Ruling Class
Factions. The Working Class is both the donor and the victim of the
results, no matter how it plays out. Well, we've now tried just about
every crazy idea that's out there. We've voted in crooks, generals,
peanut planters and now, a shady billionaire(self proclaimed). How
about trying a member of the Working Class? I hear there's a bunch of
them out of work, and most are more tuned into what's going on. Why
don't we hold our own people to be intelligent? Have we really bought
into the slop being fed us by the Billionaires?
Carl Jarvis
On 4/23/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Under terms set forth by Mick Mulvaney, President Trump's budget
chief, the ruination of Obamacare is once again tied up with keeping
the government running. (photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters) The White
House Seems Excited to Shut Down the Government
By Ryan Lizza, The New Yorker
23 April 17
Next Saturday, April 29th, is President Trump’s hundredth day in
office, a historical marker used by the press to assess a new
President’s progress since the first term of Franklin Delano
Roosevelt. F.D.R. was grappling with the Great Depression, and he had
a pliant Congress that would have passed almost anything he proposed.
Presidents since then have often struggled to meet the expectations
of the hundred-day report card but generally can point to a list of
major legislative accomplishments. Trump does not have such a list.
At the same time, the Trump White House is facing a much more
consequential deadline, one that will help define his first months in
office and perhaps his first term: absent a spending deal with
Democrats and Republicans in Congress, next Saturday the government will
shut down.
While the potential for a government shutdown has been overshadowed
by other events—Syria, North Korea, the attempted repeal of
Obamacare—the Trump White House is suddenly seized with the issue.
“Next week is going to have quite high drama,” a top White House
official, who sounded excited by the coming clash, told me. “It’s
going to be action-packed. This one is not getting as much attention,
but, trust me, it’s going to be the battle of the titans.
And the great irony here is that the call for the government shutdown
will come on—guess what?—the hundredth day. If you pitched this in a
studio, they would say, ‘Get out of here, it’s too ridiculous.’ This
is going to be a big one.”
The last government shutdown was in October, 2013, and was widely
blamed on conservative Republicans in the House, with a major assist
from Senator Ted Cruz, who demanded that Obamacare had to be
defunded, a ludicrous strategy given that Barack Obama was President.
Congress failed to pass the necessary legislation, and the government
closed for two weeks before Republicans came back to the table. At
the time, many predicted that the tactic would have dire political
consequences for the G.O.P., but the following year the Party
expanded its majority in the House and took over the Senate.
Republican leaders have prevented their right wing from forcing
shutdowns in the years since, but one lesson from 2013 is that the
threat of a government shutdown is a powerful way to press for
concessions without paying too high a political price.
In recent weeks, the prospect of a government shutdown seemed low. In
the House and Senate, Democratic and Republican appropriators, who,
despite ideological differences, are often united in their desire to
spend money, were making steady progress. But there was an elephant
in the room. In mid-March, the Trump Administration released a
detailed spending request that included a large increase for the
military and for immigration enforcement and massive cuts to domestic
discretionary spending. While the budget was released with fanfare,
the White House seemed to retreat from the talks, leaving
congressional Democrats and Republicans to continue their work without
much guidance from Trump.
Yesterday, that changed. Mick Mulvaney, a Republican and former
congressman who was one of the House members who agitated for the
2013 shutdown and is now Trump’s budget director, announced that
“elections have consequences.”
The consequence, it would seem, was a divisive proposal. Mulvaney
suggested that if Trump didn’t get his defense spending and border
wall—which, it should be noted, he promised would be paid for by
Mexico—then the federal payments, known as cost-sharing reduction
subsidies, or C.S.R., that pay for health insurance for millions of
Americans under Obamacare had to be cut from the spending bill. The
ruination of Obamacare is once again tied up with keeping the
government running.
The funding legislation likely can’t pass in the House without some
Democratic votes, and it certainly can’t pass without Democratic
votes in the Senate, where Republicans need eight Democrats to reach
the sixty-vote threshold to prevent a filibuster. The two sides
aren’t even close.
“There’s a big spread between the bid and the ask here,” the White
House official said, noting that Trump wanted thirty billion dollars
for defense, several billion for more ICE agents and the border wall,
as well as eighteen billion dollars in cuts to domestic spending and
the ability to withhold federal money from cities that don’t
coöperate with immigration officials.
The big priorities for Democrats are the money for those people who
need Obamacare subsidies, the protection of domestic spending, and
increases for programs for opioid addiction and health care for coal
miners, the last two being issues that Trump ostensibly campaigned on.
These shouldn’t be a big deal, Democrats say, and they have accused
the White House of throwing a grenade into negotiations in order to
wrest some sort of political victory in the first hundred days. “For
weeks, the House and Senate Democrats and Republicans have been
working well together,” a Democratic aide said.
“Then,
all of a sudden, the White House is looking at next week and they
have nothing to show for the first one hundred days, and they either
want a health-care bill to pass next week, which seems like a heavy
lift, or to get more on immigration from this process. Even
Republicans don’t want this fight, and they don’t want a shutdown on
Day One Hundred of the Trump Administration.”
The White House, which is trying to force another vote on an
Obamacare repeal, seems desperate to either win some of Trump’s
priorities in a deal next week, or force a government shutdown that
it can blame on Democrats.
That might energize Trump’s supporters, who don’t have much to
celebrate yet.
But it’s not just the Democrats who oppose several Trump priorities.
Congressional Republicans, who are generally united in support for
the increase in defense spending, are divided on the border wall,
which is not popular among border-state Republicans, and the deep
domestic-spending cuts.
So far, it does not look like a bridgeable gap. “This is going to be
high-stakes poker,” the White House official said. When I asked if a
shutdown was likely, the official paused for several seconds. “I
don’t know,” the official said. The official added, “I just want my
wall and my ICE agents.”
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner