Send some love!
The worst-case scenario is that we wake up on November 9 with a president-elect supported by racists, homophobes and other disaffected whites who bought into his provably false myths.
The best-case scenario is that all those racists, homophobes and rubes wake up on November 9 pissed off and ready to fight.
Somebody wins and somebody loses every election. The losers predictably holler and complain. Sometimes they challenge the results in court. Sometimes they threaten to leave the country (though few actually do).
What we haven’t had before is a candidate who appeals so directly to the while masses angry at the rise of an America that no longer looks like them, and who seem immune to any facts which contradict their beliefs, inspired by a campaign that seems to take any and every opportunity to privilege a good-sounding lie over an uncongenial truth. The chair of the Trump campaign in Mahoning County, Ohio believes there was “no racism” during the 1960s and that “if you’re black and you haven’t been successful in the last 50 years, it’s your own fault… it’s not our fault, certainly.” The candidate for Vice-President of the United States believes New York City’s stop-and-frisk tactic “saved lives” and was on “sound constitutional footing.” (It didn’t, and it wasn’t.) Trump himself lies so frequently that the Internet can barely keep up with it.
But his supporters are not just credulous, they are heavily armed as well, and seem unlikely to be magnanimous in defeat. Trump has been increasingly waving the bloody shirt of a rigged election as an applause line at rallies. His supporters have been frequently quoted as saying they will form militias if their candidate does not win the election, while one of his top advisers predicts a “bloodbath” if Hillary wins.
And that’s the best case. The worst case, of course (which is looking less and less unlikely as we approach Election Day) is that he will win. But #neverTrump people should be under no illusions that this will all go away if Hillary manages to eke out more electoral votes than Donald.
I would love to believe that this all doesn’t get a lot worse before it gets better. I’m just not sure that I can.
Yesterday’s post about the M5S has got me thinking about my teenage anarchist ideals. In particular, the language about “from the base to the summit” – citizens expressing their will to their “spokespeople” in Parliament – reminded me strongly of something from the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, one of my radical heroes back in the day when I used to hop the train to Philadelphia and devour subversive texts at places like the Wooden Shoe.
In his “Revolutionary Catechism,” Bakunin declared:
The political and economic organization of social life must not, as at present, be directed from the summit to the base – the center to the circumference – imposing unity through forced centralization. On the contrary, it must be reorganized to issue from the base to the summit – from the circumference to the center…
Bakunin fled to Italy, interestingly enough, after the collapse of the Polish revolution. And it was in Napoli that he formed the “International Alliance of Social Democracy,” which would become the International Workers’ Association (a/k/a the First International). So there’s some poetic justice in the fact that this new experiment in radical democracy should be coming from Italy as well: the country my anarchist grandfather fled when Mussolini came to power.
As pessimistic as I’ve gotten about politics in recent years, I’m excited at the idea that something like this could happen in the US. After all, if a country just starting to get online can take up democracy-by-Meetup in a big way, how much more could we do it in a country where people seem to have smartphones as prosthetic attachments.
I will assert that there are no people more politically cynical than the Italians. The citizens of the US are pretty much Maoists by comparison. But I see as strong a desire here to escape the political Kabuki and have a government that actually speaks to the aspirations and concerns of the people as I do in Italy. And with the sequester and the coming of austerity to the United States, we could very well be in the same boat as the Italians sooner than we may imagine.
But who will be our Grillo?
There seem to be, in the main, two and only two schools of thought about the future: “OMG WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!” and “it’ll be fine, don’t worry about it.” Depending on where you stand politically, you might be at one extreme on, say climate, and at the other on something like the US public debt.
What seems to be missing is a forward-leaning, active view of the future as something we have the power to create, or at least materially affect.
On this page, I’m going to explore the idea of a more empowered outlook; not as a pollyannish blind optimism or a mindless faith in technology, but as a spirit of adventure. I’m talking about an attitude of resilience rather than fear or mere hope. The future I want to build is less about walls and gates as it is about roads and bridges. The way we’ve been living on has put a lot of dangers in our path. I’m interested in taking an undaunted look at all of those dangers, avoiding the ones we can, and preparing for the ones we can’t avoid or don’t even know about yet.
Tools, tips, tricks, habits of mind… clue-sticks, all of them: they’re what we’ll need to not only survive, but thrive in a challenging future.
Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing. – Helen Keller, author, activist, lecturer, humanitarian