Moments in American Multiculturalism

Jay Leno reminds us that there's truth in comedy:


Thanks Everything is Terrible!

Did you know that hating homosexuals is now considered expressing your freedom?

Well, like this bigot's weird argument about natural rights and reproductive responsibilities, it's a load of conservative horseshit.

GOPride? That's pretty hilarious, too.

This is how American conservatives talk politics when they get together and celebrate their values. Actually, this self-righteous American dude is a member of a conservative youth group. A popular one on college and university campuses across the US. Conservatives like to encourage young men and women to hate with a rather high level of energy. Young Americans for Freedom is, among other things, a Glee Club for Hate. Where bros and their girlfriends can get together and talk conspiracy and white power and learn how to use rhetoric to tie it all in to the American Tradition. So, when they get older they can be more like Karl Rove or Dick Cheney than Barrack Obama.



I expect nothing less from the Young Americans for Freedom, but the weird conservative getting up at the end of the clip stating "freedom of opinion, freedom of opinion" over and over is truly grotesque. CPAC is a place for all the bigots to call home.

GOP politicians and the conservatives who end up voting for them each election cycle like to claim that they are into "big tent" politics, meaning that they are a diverse group. And the argument insists that they are a more diverse group than liberals. Well, yes, they are. If you include all the far right bigots in the US in your tent, then you are a big tent. You win. Good for you and your rotten values. I still would argue that your tent is pretty fucking white.

(Oh and do listen to Ann Coulter, who is looking pretty gaunt and tired these days. Listen to her clip about the diff between wars of convenience and necessity. Like always, she supposedly has a point.)

dagConfessions: Power & The Right To Peacefully Assemble

A US citizen visiting Korea for more than a year might have a hard time understanding Korean Democracy without doing a little homework. My wording might seem a little odd, but I think I could have been here for three months and not have come away with the desire to write this post (other than to share the story.)

The longer I live in Korea, the more I learn about the way the government and police operate. What disturbs me isn't the fact that I know about oppression and now I can see it happening outside my window. I'm not precious. I'm coming to terms with the fact that I haven't ever experienced a difference in how citizens think about Law. I guess I'm experiencing a kind of alienation for the first time that I could easily permit to become anger and frustration directed at Koreans and about Korean culture. But I want to resist that temptation because I think it's power I'm experiencing. Power, that as a white guy from the US, I have never confronted. I've read about it, sure. But this is different.

Koreans and Americans do not have the same experience and understanding of Law. A little knowledge of history explains the experiential aspect of the difference between our cultures. It's our, Korean and American, understanding of Law I want to quickly focus on before sharing a story from The Hankyoreh to illustrate my feelings. Feel free to comment if you disagree or want me to flesh this out. I'm more than willing to.

Many Americans, I'm ashamed to admit, don't really know that the reason we think and act like we do, as Americans do, has a lot to do with Laws. In the US, we have a Constitution and system of Laws that protects rights and punishes crimes. Americans like to talk about Rights all the time. We like to insist our Rights are Natural, even that we are born with them. We even have much of Continental Philosophy (See, Kant et al.) to back-up our notions that democratic life within a capitalist market is part of Nature's unknowable plan to guide us to ever more control of ourselves and toward overall Liberty. Nevertheless, we forget that without our enforceable social contract, all our Rights would simply be wishful and hopeful thinking. Yes, I'm saying that Americans take it for granted. I think we all know this is true.

Koreans have Laws with a big "L", too; it is, after all, the Republic of Korea. But Korean citizens don't think about their Republic as a Republic of Laws in the same manner Americans do. Laws in Korea are tools used by the police and the government to enforce the government's will, which is more appropriately stated as enforce the majority Party's will.

Koreans simply cannot freely speak in public in opposition to their government's ruling Party without worrying about punishment. Nor do they have the ability to freely assemble to protest and/or to organize in dissent without worrying about punishment. And when they do assemble in groups in active dissent, punishment does occur. A tourist passing through Seoul on a summer weekend would have to be blind not to notice the massive police presence in the streets.

I'm trying to come to terms with the visible and sometimes abject oppression many Koreans and immigrants struggle with here. The only thing that keeps me from running back to the US in disgust is that I'm well aware that, though Americans like to pretend it's otherwise, we have abject oppression in the US that is quite comparable while less widespread. In Seoul, it's easy for me to see it. I'm not from here. At home, I have to look for it. But it's there.

What I'm trying to come to terms with is understanding the middle-ground Korea occupies right now between the totalitarianism of the recent past and a more free Democracy of the sometime in the future. And I want to understand why Koreans don't have the feeling that it's their right. That's for another post, though. (And I should say that all the liberal and leftist Koreans I have met would say that it is their right. I'm generalizing here, of course, and I hope not too much.)

Below is a link to a story from a recent edition of The Hankyoreh. Korea's versions of Conservative Republicans are members of the Grand National Party (GNP). The American GOP and the Korean GNP have a lot in common. At this moment in time, both parties' membership likes to claim that they know better than everybody else how to legislate. In addition, they are the parties of old, well-off men and their sons and their wives. GNP visions of Korean daily life remind me of the white power structure that guides the GOP through its decision-making back home.

Currently, The GNP is attempting to enact a law that would make it illegal for people to assemble in groups between 10pm and 6am. The dissenting members of government insist that this could be handled by instituting a permit process, that an outright ban would be too extreme.

The law isn't the problem here; the warrant the GNP uses to argue in support of it is the problem. The GNP's reason is that somebody might break a law or a late assembly might turn violent. It's a real problem, this logic. A US citizen would say without too much pushing: Hey, a person has to commit a crime before being charged with one. We don't use laws to prohibit people from choosing to break laws. People choose to participate in our social contract. If a person breaks a law, then we punish that person. And so on.

In Korea, the social contract is an idea and law is a tool used to enforce participation. For the most part, Koreans accept this enforcement. Rather than shaping legislation that encourages peaceful participation in free discourse, laws that suggest what a true disturbance is, a law is suggested that prohibits all assembly. Most foreign historians and essayists on Korea like to argue that the existence of this general acceptance of oppression is a hangover from the bad days when dictators ran daily life in Korea. Well, I think that's a shitty excuse for a real problem that needs real reform to ever change. In addition, I think it's terribly patronizing to listen to white intellectuals talk about Korea's hangovers. It's a shitty, demeaning, and anti-intellectual means to addressing a complex cultural construct.

GNP introduces bill to completely ban nighttime outdoor assemblies

Here are two paragraphs from the article. They highlight the problem I address above:

The GNP lawmakers at the committee meeting, including Cho, called for the bill to be passed during the February extraordinary assembly after the bill had been handed over to a subcommittee for legal deliberation. GNP Lawmaker Kim Tae-won said concerns over the destruction of evidence or escape were great regarding nighttime assemblies, and they could very likely turn into violent demonstrations. Thus, he added that until a peaceful demonstration culture takes root in South Korea, a time restriction would have to be placed on outdoor demonstrations.

Democratic Party Lawmakers Kang Gi-jung and Kim Yoo-jung, however, protested the bill, saying that since it excessively restricts the people’s Constitutionally-guaranteed basic rights, it would be better to place limits on noise or venues rather than time. They called on the GNP to drop discussion of amending the Assembly Law and instead hold hearings to gather public opinion. A bill proposed by Democratic Party Lawmaker Chun Jung-bae and Democratic Labor Party Lawmaker Lee Jung-hee, currently stuck in committee, would in principle permit nighttime outdoor assemblies under the condition that participants maintain law and order.

Tea Party: The Party of White Power

If you thought that Tea Party populism is about change in America, you're right. It's about turning the clocks back to Reconstruction Era culture. Separatism, White Power, selective immigration, Theocracy, et al. Tom Tancredo's opening speech is enough to make me puke.

Tell me that Tancredo's speech is not brought to you by the people who can't believe we elected a black man. He tries to hide his well-known bigotry by mentioning John McCain (after all, Conservatives love to hate on that guy anyway,) but this is all repressed hatred and fear of a black planet nonsense. Don't stop listening after he calls for literacy tests; the best is yet to come when he calls for all non-Christians to leave the US.

Remember, Tancredo is the guy who believes "we should bomb Mecca." He needs the Tea Party and has been waiting for this moment. It's like a Coming Out Party.

Imagine, relevance for Nationalist White Power sentiments in the US!

Capitalist Christian Crisis

"All Christians should know, well everyone should, that it's opening up a person to attack, spiritually," he said. "Christians shouldn't use it." As quoted on FOXNews.

Conservativism is self-contradictory. Cons won't shut up about the integrity of the free market and the need for reduced government and regulation. They say, the market works better without regulation. Most of them don't know where this idea comes from and have never read the Adam Smith, Ludwig von Mises, or F.A. Hayek who championed it; however, they are damn sure that if you mess with the market you hurt capitalism and your chances to live that wealthy and secure life you've always dreamed about living. A consumer needs to make his or her own choices and those potential choices should not be curbed prior to the point of sale.

Von Mises liked to argue that consumers are "the captains" of the market, that consumers steer the ship of capitalism. It's nonsense: this consumer power: consumers shaping demand therefore supply therefore price has never been a reality and won't become a reality with less regualtion. If I sound cynical, sarcastic and unconvinced, I admit I am. The "liberal social order" of the capitalist market is not, by any stretch of the imagination never mind philosophy, what you can call good economic theory. The key word is "order". What Hayek and von Mises were up to was attacking socialism and the science of Marx. It's not hard to do with the abject failure of Russian and Chinese Communist revolutions. Call all socialists totalitarians; scare the shit out of citizens who are too busy supporting families to study the economic history and theory; create a theory that supports your world view to keep your ideological foes at a distance and your base in line.

Hayek and von Mises firmly believe in a catalactic economy: that capitalism, at its best, permits people to participate in exchanges (buying and selling goods and services) that turn enemies into friends. Unbridled Capitalism should unite the world. Hayek's use of "catalaxy" in "Principles of a Liberal Social Order" and von Mises' use of it in Human Action are telling. (Von Mises uses catalactic, if my memory serves me here. I could have the spelling wrong.) These words come from the Greek word for cattle. When you're trading cattle with a guy, you're not at war with him. It's common sense, right? Free Trade is supposed to support the development of Democracy. We know how idealistic this is. Actually, it's utopian. As utopian as Lenin ever was. As we have seen, the United States is more than happy to use its military to enforce its values when trade doesn't work.

Why am I offering a summary of my critique of Hayek and von Mises in a post about FoxNews, Christian Conservatives, and Human Life International (HLI)? It's to illustrate why I am always on about American Conservatives contradicting themselves and making a mess of society.

The quote above is from Stephen Phelan from HLI. I'd link to their web site, but it has been down for some time. So, I'm linking instead to Reality Check's information about the group and its associated organizations. It's a fair and accurate entry.

Phelan is quoted above in a story on FOXNews. Fox, as we are all aware, is a news network that fiercely defends conservative, free-market ideals. They like to lie about their partisan behavior, but all media organizations lie about lying. It's annoying that Fox has Americans believing it's "fair and balanced" bullshit. But what can you do about that? It's a waste of time pissing and moaning about it, in my opinion. Fact is, the other networks are only slightly less conservative.
[Rachel Maddow might be the only progressive out there, right now. She insists on fact-checking, fair debate, transparency, and of course the true conservatives in both parties refuse to appear on her show. ]

Regulation & the Democrats Who Regulate is a popular theme in Fox's daily programming. After all, the current Tea Party movement is supposed to be a grass-roots and populist struggle: a return to small government in order to provide Americans with a greater promise of Liberty and appropriate Representation. And the enemy of small government according to conservatives is the liberal establishment.

Is this an accurate portrait of the American market and political discourse? Not at all. Conservatives have never been honest with their whining about regulation. I could address the nonsense that Republicans support smaller government. We could look at how the government grew under both Reagan and Bush. Facts are undeniable.

Human Life International is a famous Catholic anti-abortion organization begun by Benedictine priest, Father Paul Marx. He's a hero to many Catholics and his well-read book, The Death Peddlers, is still used to argue about supposed truths of the Reproductive Choice Movement. A priest like Father Marx who dedicates his life to serving others is not necessarily a hypocrite. I'm not criticizing his work. After all, we have the right to organize and protest and speak our minds. He remained true to his beliefs.

It's that FOXNews will distribute Father Marx's HLI rhetoric to the public without remarking about it's pro-regulation platform. We want health care reform in the United States, and FOXNews will spend hours and hours decrying it as socialism in the guise of reform. What is a Catholic organization up to with its mission to criminalize reproductive choice? It's theocratic regulation. It's one group out of many attempting to legislate its spiritual and moral codes.

HLI seeks nothing less than to convince government to strictly regulate the behavior of American citizens. It seeks nothing less than to regulate the market. It seeks nothing less than to increase the size and influence of government in our everyday lives. HLI is well aware of this. As a conservative Catholic organization, its members are not at all opposed to legislating Catholic Doctrine. They are true believers. Where are our Conservative, Free Market Principles and where are the defenders of Freedom and Liberty when you need them?

It's easy to illustrate the hypocrisy of American Conservatives. In fact, any people who claim to represent common sense while using and manipulating conventional wisdom typically must deny contradiction and paradox, any complexities whatsoever, in wild attempt to maintain practicality in the face of chaotic everyday life. When things get complicated, conservatives get simple, deny philosophy and promote sensibility.

In fact, I could say this about liberals and leftists, as well. It's tempting to move away from active discourse in a public sphere where free speech is promoted and into the legislative sphere where Laws restrict behavior and proscribe speech according to basic principles. It's hard to resist using Law to oppress others. This is not simply a conservative sin, so to speak. Nevertheless, Conservative Christianity is dangerous because it relies on the status quo and the white power structure for its strength. As a social movement, it's organizing principle is based on it's members fear of difference and love of condemnation: the pleasure they get when prosecuting others. It's white, it's Christian and it's interested in nothing less than legislating its principles so that, no matter who you are, you'll have to act in a manner suitable to their doctrine of daily life.

The left sings Yes We Can; the Right replies No You Can't. The Tea Party, in fact, is all about saying NO. That's how it works. Actually, these folks are not interested in Liberty. Many of them are disenfranchised white-power junkies. They are predominantly Christian. They want to create an America that looks like them. It's a difficult task, since Americans decidedly do not look nor act like they do. This populist movement was spurred by the election of a black man and Christian ideologues are now going to attach themselves to it. It has been brewing for quite some time within the anti-immigration movement.

Fear not. They won't accomplish much. In the battle between Capitalism and Spirituality, we can count on one thing only. People are Consumers before they are Christians. Capitalists have even The Supreme Court on their side. Christians must learn to be content with arguing that pink ouija boards are bad for your spiritual health.

US Health Care Reform

I responded to this post from Katharine Q. Seelye on the New York Times' health care debate blog "Prescriptions". I doubt my comment has been moderated yet, as I just posted it, but it should be up soon. When it gets posted, it's possible I'll write a little more about here.