Gilles D' Aymery suggests, in a sally against the pseudo-Left:
What do American fake-Progressives, busy signing liberal manifestos, self-defined pseudo-Marxists, and laptop-Revolutionaries do when they want to fight the Republicrooks du jour? Do they unite and promote third-party candidates like the many worthy of consideration in the Green Party? Do they fight for, and advocate change? Do they come with proposals, platforms, no-nonsense politics? Some do and some don't, in lengthy essays and posts all over the blogosphere, but in any case, when the time comes for another biennial election cycle, whether congressional or presidential, they tend to have second thoughts.And then, of course, the discussion gets mean.
At any rate, I accept his challenge. Here is my five-point platform:
1) How about if we were to design a civilization that does not consume 85 million barrels of oil every day? That would do something real about both peak oil and global warming, something even the Pentagon and the carbon-traders can't do.
2) What about ending world hunger? You'd think the politicos could get up for that, like they got up for the "Iraq reconstruction" money that was wasted.
3) Anyone for doing something about the "tragedy of the commons" in the oceans?
4) How about reparations to African-Americans for slavery and Jim Crow and racism?
5) Should we negotiate debt forgiveness for the US in exchange for the end of dollar hegemony?
But we don't hear anything like this, in this election year or in any year, from any candidate. Instead, we are witness to endless, cynical attempts to manipulate voters through neurotic appeals into voting for candidate A ahead of candidate B without having to promise anything meaningful. And nobody learns anything. As an educator, I must protest. Wouldn't an attempt to be serious about politics do something about the bad taste in our mouths from the attempt to impeach a President for lying about sex (while ignoring his frivolous bombing attack on Serbia)?