Progressives will always be fighting an uphill battle, because it is more difficult to appeal to the higher sensibilities of man. Pushing the buttons of fear, racism, greed and anger is an easier task, witness the present flap over healthcare.

I wish we could find a way to more effectively articulate the case for self-interested liberalism. I’m not a believer in the notion that healthcare is a “right” enjoyed by all citizens; I want a good healthcare system because I want to live in a better society.

Good Sunday morning, Glenn. Great writing.
It seems that we are once again fighting for Democracy – I thought we already did that. The battle will be much more difficult this time because the enemy is entrenched. The love of liberty is not in their agenda.
Thanks for the post.

Theoretically, I don’t believe health care needs to be established as a unique right. It’s pretty much covered by the “Life, liberty and pursuit of happiness part.”

We may have to extend the “right,” however, when power destroys life and liberty in its pursuit of more power and more wealth. Health care is a civil right, small “r”, especially when we note that the poor and excluded die younger, suffer more.

We’ll never be done fighting for democracy. Democracy is the fight.

The only real mystery is why Democrats remain so reluctant to use their most potent weapon: the language of their hearts.

Its no mystery. Glenn Greenwald expressers it well:

The attempt to attract GOP support was the pretext which Democrats used to compromise continuously and water down the bill. But — given the impossibility of achieving that goal — isn’t it fairly obvious that a desire for GOP support wasn’t really the reason the Democrats were constantly watering down their own bill? Given the White House’s central role in negotiating a secret deal with the pharmaceutical industry, its betrayal of Obama’s clear promise to conduct negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN no less), Rahm’s protection of Blue Dogs and accompanying attacks on progressives, and the complete lack of any pressure exerted on allegedly obstructionists “centrists,” it seems rather clear that the bill has been watered down, and the “public option” jettisoned, because that’s the bill they want — this was the plan all along.

the stirring language you cite from the dawn of the American Republic calls for renunciation of the current status quo in Washington D.C., a status quo of which the Democratic Party is an integral part.

see “the ratchet effect”

The electoral ratchet permits movement only in the rightward direction. The Republican role is fairly clear; the Republicans apply the torque that rotates the thing rightward.
The Democrats’ role is a little less obvious. The Democrats are the pawl. They don’t resist the rightward movement — they let it happen — but whenever the rightward force slackens momentarily, for whatever reason, the Democrats click into place and keep the machine from rotating back to the left.

so, if folks can accept that Hazlitt’s description of Power as an opponent applies full well to the Democrats as well as the buffoonish Republicans, then it will be time to move forward against ” The cancer that is runaway power “.

The corporations are not even pretending to support us. They aren’t even trying to fool us anymore.

Have we gotten to the point where lack of benefits outweighs coverage?

We need to find a way to move away from the computer and into the streets peacefully. We need to show up at town hall meetings. We need to meet one another. The work we have done already is important. It is the basis for taking back the democracy in America. But I think many of us are fooled into thinking we have done our part by blogging and sending money to a cause. I know I suffer from this. We need a structure by which to accomplish the physical act of moving out into the world and changing it. (I say all of this knowing that many are functioning at a very high level and effecting change.) We need thousands of people doing this everyday. Thousands. Or they will continue to murder us by spreadsheet.

The progressives are a strong, passionate community but we stay in our heads too much.

That some Democrats, including Rahm, are complicit with this awful power seems self evident. And it’s what I mean when I speak of illicit bedmates. Blind loyalty to party would be foolish under any circumstance.

HERE’S a great point to which very few address, even progressives;

even in the animal kingdoms, where the breed has a society, sometimes known as a flock, a school, a pride, a herd, a brood, from time before man walked on two legs, we had universal health care, whence the young and sick are protected and provided for by the healthy and strong

however since there became “corporations” which are not people, they have promoted the notion that “people need to take care of themselves, it’s not a social responsibility”

of course it’s a social responsibility, we are only as strong as our weakest and the stronger gain more might when the weakest among them are healthy

this is brutally obvious once told isn’t it

here’s another point most people don’t discuss, though it NEEDS to be part of every health care discussion;

the government gets a positive return by bringing most people back into productivity and keeping them healthy, there are of course tax considerations, there is productivity consideration, there is also the intangible, inventions that might not be discovered, breakthrough that might not be found if a person is not brought back into productivity

that point mitigates if not entirely pay for public health care

on the other hand, the health industry gets a negative return when they provide the service people are paying for, the more claims they accept the worse their profit and bottom line

the private model is in the business of denying claims, the public model is in business to promote a healthy nation

again, brutally obvious once told.

those two points must become part of this health care discussions

Very true,marymccurnin. We have to do it. Many are. The level of progressive activism is so much higher now than a decade ago, well, we’ve made tremendous gains. But we we did yesterday we did yesterday. See you on the streets.

The fact that many Dems are indebted to the same special interests as the opposition is certainly a factor. Perhaps equally or possibly more disturbing are recent hints that Dem timidity in the health care reform debate owes to crass political calculation, the theory being that if they push too hard the insurance and drug companies will dedicate themselves to backing the GOP in the midterms.

I am no politician but I have a theory of my own, appearing weak and ineffective won’t help Dems win any future elections.

even in the animal kingdoms…the young and sick are protected and provided for by the healthy and strong

the government gets a positive return by bringing most people back into productivity and keeping them healthy

You are right on both points.

Your theory is, at least, partly right. Made the more frustrating because the politicians’ fears are ridiculous. I don’t think they are as afraid of getting beat as they are losing out on big bribes, that is, campaign contributions.

I don’t know, Glenn, I don’t really think of health as a matter of liberty. In fact it is an article of faith for the other side that “freedom”, or “liberty” is the right to fail and the right to not have your possessions confiscated for the benefit of others. I tend to think universal health care is more effectively treated as part of the social contract, falling within a government responsibility to “promote the general welfare.” It becomes a right, like any other right of membership, if the citizenship says it does.

From the standpoint of emotion, or passion, I would be most effective to emphasize the social contract aspect; that we are a union, we are responsible for each other. To the other side, we are something like a game preserve, for the practice of social Darwinism.

Citizen Glenn W. Smith:

Thanks for the wonderful thought sentences Brother Smith…”The love of liberty is the love of others, the love of power is the love of ourselves.” That one goes out to my children today…ken you give us a bit more about this cat William Hazlitt, I have some shadows of memory bouncin’ off the back wall of the cave that is my mind these days.

If they lose they just move into a job with a corporation and make more money and have more power. Their weakness is a means to an end. Why do they hate America?

“Medicare Card Burners

I keep waiting for opponents of “government run health care” who are over sixty-five to begin burning their Medicare Cards, perhaps while singing “We shall overcome!”

ChangingAging.org 8/13/09 5:46 AM Dr. Bill Thomas”

If liberty is the love of others, as Hazlitt said and I believe it is, and if empathy is fundamental to progressive morality, then the love of liberty (of others) is crucial to my moral position that you deserve health care.

It can’t be argued that unequal access to health care, the enforced sickness and early death of those less economically advantaged, isn’t an assault on liberty. It is. Certainly, citizens can and do behave irresponsibly with regard to their own health, and freedom means, I suppose, that they have that “right.” However, you can’t drive without a seatbelt. You can’t smoke in a public place. So, some of those freedoms are curtailed on behalf of both individual and collective welfare.

So glad you’re here, NF. I always find myself waiting for your comments.

Hazlitt. With Montaigne, writers’ favorite essayist. A real troublemaker in his time. Had there been blogs, he’d be the godfather of blogging.

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

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRhazlitt.htm

The University of Michigan has his collected political essays online, I can’t find the link right now. They also publish them in a softcover edition. Michigan’s program of making these essential works more accessible deserves great praise.

Liberals, progressives, Democrats and even moderates ceeded the field over 30 years ago as the right wing went about co-opting the media, building their own media outlets in both radio and television and creating belief tanks that twisted research into pretzels to fit their preconceived ideology. Through repitition the propaganda of the far right has gained a foothold on the conciousness of large swaths of the American public, corporate media and the punditocracy. Progressives elements took far too much for granted, seeing their ideals and beliefs as nothing more than “common sense” amongnst the populace, not recognizing these values need constant reinforcement . The radical right has always known that the struggle is never ending and their actions speak to that “wisdom”.

you may also enjoy:

http://www.lib.umich.edu/labadie-collection

The Joseph A. Labadie Collection is the oldest research collection of radical history in the United States, documenting a wide variety of international social protest movements of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It is named for anarchist and labor organizer Joseph Antoine Labadie (1850-1933).

Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon is a more apt analogy to the erosion of Posse Comitatus and the stationing of our military within our borders. The historical precursor to a military coup.

“When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.” – Jimi Hendrix

I’ve always loved Hazlitt, way ahead of his time and endlessly quotable

k, now to read the post and comments

I guess I still have a different conception of liberty than you and Hazlitt. I think you could probably have pretty close to compete liberty if you were a hermit in the wilderness, who had no dealings with other human beings. If my freedom to swing my fist ends where your nose begins, or my right to yell “fire” ends in a crowded theater, my freedom is restricted by relationship (either caring or uncaring) with others. On the other hand, if I want to enjoy the benefits of association, the general welfare, it becomes incumbent on me to contribute to that same general welfare.

I’m not really attempting to refute your viewpoint, but libertarians and Republicans do very well at creating passion by successfully portraying laws and programs as impositions on the liberty of some for the benefit of others, that I think our sprit of teamwork, caring, being brother’s keeper, call it patriotism, might be more passionate. Okay, that’s it for me.

You are experienced.

With such a foe there is no possibility of reasoned compromise. In a democracy, the recognition of that fact is the first principle of leadership. To ignore it is to sacrifice the love of others to the deception that self-preservation will let one live to fight another day in a battle that one will never join. Power enjoys injustice, but injustice is born of just that cowardly deception.

Worthy of Hazlitt. Needs to be said louder, more often and with fewer words.

Mr. Obama engages in the shopworn lie of politicians that he can accommodate and compromise with those who vehemently oppose what he claims to believe and want. It’s a seeming variation on the biblical themes of how we ought to relate to one another, themes starkly at odds with the Bible’s own tales of power, corruption and failure. From a Chicago pol, they smack of cynicism washed in smooth tones and clothed in sackcloth.

Mr. Obama is either a fool or takes us for one. He’s no fool. He doesn’t believe in what he says or want it very much. We should know what he does want, for we shall surely get it.

I don’t think we disagree, actually. Maybe it’s because the definition of liberty here is broadened to include the “caring, being brother’s keeper…” you refer to. Freedom is plural. It makes no sense to say the hermit on the desert island is “free,” because the term loses its references — which are to other people.

Citizen Crosstimbers:

Let me see if I ken help ya here with the healthcare thing and the concept of “liberty”. If you accept a priori that in a civilized society access to healthcare is a basic human right, then you don’t get distracted by diversions about freedom and the right to fail…universal access to healthcare is easy to argue within the confines of the liberal definition of liberty as nuthin’ more than equality of opportunity.

What they are especially good at is convincing those they socially and economically abuse that they, too, will benefit from policies designed to benefit only them. It’s an elegant, two-faced lie that Dickens described well.

Dammit, Norske!

There you go, again, putting “it” in plain, clear language.

DW

Well said.

It seems that the corporate bloodlust fully unleashed under Bush II cannot be turned back. I honestly do not know where these bastards will take their money and live when they have sucked every drop of blood from our country.

We have to keep fighting, though I am tired today.

Although this is a little off topic, as an older guy, I thought I would mention my own “death plans” or “instructions”. I’m on Lipitor, for cholesterol, but have decided that a quick heart attack is far from the worst option. Accordingly, at age 70, I will begin to eat even more Blue Bell than I normally want to. I’ve left instructions to my family to keep shovelling it in, regardless. Since you live in Texas, I figured you would understand about Blue Bell. Good post, and have a nice day.

I can accept that, but the people I see out yelling and holding signs, and many of the “every man for himself” people I know, who make up a fair part of the electorate, can’t (until they need to benefit from it.)

And that is why they are the least free among us.

Absolutely spot on!

Excellent post, Glenn.

Thank you.

DW

Thanks so much. Pass it along to others.

Indeedy so, Glenn.

Many very excellent talking-points.

And, up with Hazlitt!

DW

There is sadly no place for reason at this juncture in the debate. We’ve been assaulted by some rather effective theater, via townhalls and teabaggers. OK, we need to go on reasoning; writing letters to editors and cngressmen. But I think we really need to march. On Washington.

There is ALWAYS place (however fraught the “time”) for reason.

It is un-reason that is destructive of humanity.

Always.

DW

This article describes the present situation in great depth . For the past several years Republicans have stood up and defended each other and their administration , on talk shows , and in print . Remember the defense of Rush after he was caught with his hand deep in the cookie jar ? Regardless of what was done they are a team that sticks together . The Democrats are a completely different group of people . At the slightest hint of a defamatory remark from the Republicans the Democrats join in the chorus and sing louder than the Republicans . Even talk show mouths like Big Ed and B.P. are going at it . But I think their problem is also maybe not getting a front row seat or not called on to ask a question . My advice is , if you are on a sinking ship do not get in the life boat with Big Ed . He might just pull the plug and drown everybody because of one person he gets ”P” ed off at . The only reason the Dems won the last two elections was because of the pain inflicted by the Repubs . Energy costs , health care costs , food prices , sneaky little tax hikes , and blatant crimes just did the the Repubs in , and even their media control wasn’t enough to get them a win . But their loss was not by a wide margin and they are working hard to not loose more ground . And with all the help the Dems are giving them they WILL return . And when they do it will be with a vengeance .

Ahhhhh, Smith Sunday.

The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves.

In full Rovian spirit, this is often read by The Other as “an air of moral superiority’ and mercilessly ridiculed.

Well, we are morally superior. :) The real problem is when we take the air of superiority but don’t articulate the morality and the values.

While this is a little off your point, I’ll take the opportunity to say that I wouldn’t live my life the way I try to (emphasis on ‘try’) if I didn’t believe deep in my heart that my moral views were worth defending. One of the practices essential to this moral view, however, is constant questioning of oneself. There is no position of privilege in the end, it is a matter of what seems the best fit for the universe and humanity from the our limited perspective.

It is the unquestioning superiority of all authoritarians that needs contesting. When the try to ridicule, we bite.

Just out of curiousity, I wonder what percentage of the world’s countries who provide their citizens with health care,consider themselves democracies?

Excellent!
It made me think and even change some of my beliefs. That rarely happens.

right, except what if a “better” society could be ahieved through genocide, or selective breeding?

Ever since “Civics” was deleted from school curriculum, it appears as though we have become less “Civil”-ized as a society,imho.

What’s interesting Glenn is both you and Rep. Wally Herger both reframe health care reform as a battle for our democracy.

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7479

And in the grander scheme of things, that’s true. But, Herger falsely frames reform as destroying our democracy. I think that the life-and-death nature of health reform, truthfully and passionately framed, would be enough to appeal to the American public.

I’ve gotten so sick of the manipulation tactic that we’re beaten over the head with by the likes of Rep. Herger and the right-wing that I felt compelled to blog it out.

- Tom

Thank you, tinman, but I’m betting you’re an open-minded person to whom searching, questioning and mind-changing are not all that uncommon.

Your observation is well-taken. Herger and the Right have an authoritarian worldview and completely different versions of democracy and freedom. In that view, there is no responsibility to others. In fact, it’s immoral as they see it. Liberty is achieved by following authority. They believe it when they say they’re for personal liberty, it just means something radically different to them.

A great problem has been the progressive reluctance to contest the Right’s conception of freedom and democracy. We argue for the policies, we use the facts, but we don’t articulate our own moral vision. And that gives them an advantage.

Thanks for pointing out the Herger bit. It helps highlight a very important matter.