Thu 18 May 2006
In an earlier post, I stated that what I want to hear come out of the next President’s inaugural address is that the Era of Fear is over, that warrantless spying would stop, that the government would be accountable, that color-coded fear-mongering would cease. More than one commenter said they liked the idea of a speech like that. So here’s my question: how do we make it happen?
Is this where we start writing to representatives? Challengers? Organize a PAC? Organize a think-tank and start producing policy papers? Organize a magazine? A march? Draft a candidate? Start a movement for a third party?
I honestly don’t know, and I honestly ask.
The thing is, I can talk about it all day long on the webbertrons. All. Day. Long. But while I know many people who read blogs, almost none of them do not also have a blog of their own. The Left is just as much a victim of the echo-chamber effect as the Right, and so while I think a lot of valuable position-taking and point-making and philosophizing happens online, I find it very hard to believe that a good idea is going to spring forth from one clever turn of phrase on a blog somewhere and launch itself into the overall discourse. If we want to effect real change in the political climate, change meant to bring about a better, more hopeful environment in which new ideas can grow and flourish, we have to get out of our chairs and do something.
And I am not, right now, doing anything. Yeah, I donated a little money to a few candidates I liked in 2004. I guess that counts, but I have trouble believing PayPal will be the lever I use to move the world.
So what do we do?
The thing is, doing is hard. We are quick to criticize the 101st Flying Keyboardists, but doing so hardly requires us to leave the comfort of our own executive-style office chairs, does it? I can talk online all day. I can talk offline all day. My mother and I spent her Mother’s Day call railing against the war and Bush and the Right in general – meaning the lasting legacy of the Bush Administration may well be his having cemented my parents’ position as slightly-left-of-center evangelicals – but neither one of us has the stones to ring up her sister, who believes Bush is the only thing that stands between Satanic brown-skinned terr’ists and her underwear drawer.
And so I ask, utterly without irony or rhetorical intent, what do we do to create change? Because if we’re going to, we need to get on the stick.
Ok, seriously, this is something I’ve thought about a lot. This was the idea I had with a few of my friends a year ago, but never did anything about:
You take a group of young(ish), bright, talented, concerned, well-educated progressives (such as my group of friends) and you establish a biweekly get-together. Say, at my house. Someone brings wine, someone brings cheese. And for six months, we pick a topic, say, healthcare in our state, and we talk about it, and talk about it, and talk about it, until there is consensus in the group of smart young go-getters about what should be done about it.
And then we actually put the plan into action. Invite an expert in the field to tell us why we’re full of it. Invite our state representitive to see if they’re already on it. Have each friend tell two friends, etc. Write letters to the editor. Etc.
Maybe it’s just a pipe dream, but it sounds like the outline of a strategy for at least getting ideas out there.
Now, the irony is that I never even put this meta-plan into action, but I still might. Really!
What do you think?
I really like it – my concern, personally, being that (a) my closest friends and I to some degree consider hang-out time as our time to escape the problems of the world, not to focus on them, so I’m not sure how many would really be up for that (mis amigos, please correct me if I’m wrong) and (b) it still leaves me wary of echo-chamber effects. My friends and I pretty much agree on the core issues: right to reproductive freedom, right to marriage equality, right to accountable government, etc., etc. Of course, getting all of us to explain why we believe in these things might help elaborate some core philosophies that can be expressed in other fora.
See this? I’m talking about it on the webbertrons and trying to let my talking stop me from doing. I am so good at this thing I should not be good at.
Hmmm.
I know one way that will work, but I’m sure as hell not doing it. I’m a firm believer in the whole “Nobody listened to King until Malcolm X made them.” Basically, swing one side so violently to the “left” that the pendulum swings closer to the middle.
Among a multitude of problems with this, I’m not sure this will work too well when the argument is over an environment of fear.
“Yaaa bastards! We’re going to stop living in an environment of fear, and if yaa don’t change your ways, we’re going to [dontgetmeNSA] a bus full of nuns! Yarr!”
Probably ain’t going to work.
90% of the problem in my book is getting the media to grown their balls back. Maybe a “wiki-news led verbal assault” on them untill they pay attention?
I watched _The Smartest Guys in the Room_ this weekend and was appalled that the Bushs’ video-taped Valentine cards to Ken Lay were NOT broadcast on every major network when Bush claimed he barely knew Ken Lay.
Bah! Easy reporting. Clip of Bush saying “I barely know the guy”, clip of Bush wishing him a happy whatever. Easy as hell.
There’s no point in trying to change the nature of the debate, and the ideas therein, until the media starts doing their job.
Not really sure how to pull that one off.
Yeah, the echo chamber is a problem, but I think it’s more fof a problem on the big picture issues. My friends and I agree on what’s important, but I don’t know that we agree (yet) on the specifics of what to do about it.
Aaron: pirate radio station?
That has potential…the more the internet blooms (assuming it doesn’t end up shackled over net neutrality issues), the more opportunities become available as well.
Maybe. Awful lot of voices to talk over.
I think he means a real, honest-to-gods, Pump Up The Volume pirate radio station. Am I right on that one? FCC issues, of course, but it would stand as much chance of reaching people as a podcast would do.
That said, a quality podcast – perhaps in the style of an NPR round-table show kind of thing, but more casual and with no sniping – would probably draw an audience. I’d subscribe to it, anyway.
I do. I mean, a pirate TV station would probably be more effective. Actually, the most effective thing would be a pirate radio show. As in, somehow pre-empt Imus with something meaningful.
I’m not sure who actually listens to podcasts. I’m as cutting-edge as they come, and I only listen to 1 or 2.
Thinking about it more, it depends what the actual goal is. Are we trying to build mindshare and energize the progressives? Maybe a really awesome podcast would do good. Are we trying to convince the “rest of America” as in Aaron’s thing about Bush and Enron? Then we have to put the information somewhere people aren’t going to have to go looking for it. On their local news, on their talk radio station, etc.
Also, if as a bonus the pirate radio station somehow ends up with Samantha Mathis circa 1990 taking her shirt off… all the better.