This is heavy, and meandering, but here goes:

Recently, I have been pondering something, which can sometimes be either a good or a bad thing. What I have been fixated upon is the progress conservatives have been making in the wake of the reeling liberals, and I can see some patterns emerging over time. Bear in mind, at one time, I considered myself to be an ultra-liberal. And while such a tag still sticks on certain issues, I have been eager to shed it in light of what I am learning. This is especially true of economic issues..but I digress. I may cover that later. The point is I am dangerously moderate now, with heavily conservative viewpoints on some issues and still some very liberal opinions on others. This is a period of transition for me, and here is some of the output from me at this time.


We often refer to the conservatives as those also being part of the establishment. This term can be a symbolic term for the government, large corporations, religious organizations (NON-activists such as your everyday Catholic, for example, who is not heavily involved in activities but goes to church regularly), suburban families, etc. Exceptions abound, but the term tends to blanket such groups of people nonetheless.

When we consider liberals, we often think of the anti-establishment. These can include protesters, non-religious and religious activists, single young people, fringe college professors, and the like. Again, exceptions exist here as well, but overall generalizations exist in spite of that.

Now, my recent musings:

History is a description of changes, failures, and successes of the establishment (rulers, governments, nations, businesses, etc). It is the establishment that has power. It is ONLY the establishment which can change itself. Only when those from the outside BECOME part of the establishment, can real change occur.

Flashing back, Vietnam protesters were loud, vocal, and visible but in reality did little if anything to change the course of the war. What happened was everything they wished against. A conservative was elected by the majority of the country...the so called "silent" majority which included people of power and number (see those listed above). It was the establishment which creates the establishement (trippy huh?), or in other words, the active, wealthy, and hard working power base places who it wants into power. Those from within have the power to change what occurs without.

Flashing forward, the Iraqi War protesters did not stop the war. The only ones with the power to stop the war are those in charge...the establishment. And it was once again the "silent majority", the hard working, wealthy, and level-headed base, the big businesses...the "establishment" which elected one of their own to power. Kerry is also part of the so called "establisment" as well, even though his views are different than the winning party. He gets that tag because he is actively working in a position of power. He is not simply standing on a street holding a sign. Kerry and Bush are both part of the machine, and are doing a great job. I do not see the "machine" as being evil or something to rebel against, but rather something to be a part of...to be a part of society and contribute. To have credibility and power to make changes if they need to be made. To simply sulk off and not want to be a part of it, and then bitch when it doesn't go your way, is to be an ignorant, lazy, fool.

And then it hit me. I should have known, and I now embrace it as the way to lead my life.

To CHANGE the establishment...to alter the status quo, one must BECOME PART of the very thing you wish to change. This does not mean to "sell out". What it does mean is that you put down your ridiculous signs, throw away the pot, cut your hair, get an education, AND GET A FUCKING JOB YOU DAMN HIPPY!!!!!!! Do NOT just attend activist meetings about animal rights, but actually GET A JOB in science and research promoting alternative methods. DO THE FUCKING LEGWORK.

To have credibility in society, you must contribute to this society. To have perspective on the so-called "establishment" you need to learn what it is all about...you must become part of it. And once you learn about it and become part of it...you may just find that YOU WERE WRONG before out of your own ignorance. And if you think there is something wrong, you now have the power to change it.

I give Common Word a lot of credit for pointing this out. He is involved in government. He is in the machine. He sees how it works and he changes things as he sees fit. No protester has as much power as he does, unless said protester is willing to work as hard as he does, and get a job in government.

It is time to put your protest sign down and actually do something to make a change. Fliers, protests, activist meetings, and all of that crap has not and will not change the ways of those in power unless you are heavily armed. And even if you are you must remember that the majority of revolutions fail unless said revolutionaires accept that they must become the "new" establishment...WHICH MEANS YOU'LL HAVE TO WORK!

You can wear your Che shirt and sing Rage Against The Machine Songs. You could even lead a revolution and overthrow a government. But if you think you can sit back when that is done, smoke your weed, and be a lazy fuck, I have news for you....YOU are now the machine and you will need to get to work. And you'll find the going tough..that is why you will find out that most of those in power or in big corporations are some of the best and brightest and hardest working people on the planet. If you can't keep pace, you deserve to fail.

Lazy hippies need not apply. Any revolution started by such people is doomed to fail. See the "youth vote" from this past election for a descriptive image of laziness and failure. Disgusting.

The truth is, not all government employees, corporate workers, and other conservative members of the "establisment" are bad people. In fact, many of them are hard at work as I write and as you read, making plans for change, creating success, and weakening their opponents. I suggest that you take your ideals and convert them into work. See if you're right or wrong...but at least be in a position to find out. If you are outside the machine, or anti-establishment, you will NEVER be in that position.

Gaining your B.S. degree, wearing long hair, attending week-long hippy fests, and protesting will not change the government or big business. You will be ignored as per usual. BUT, getting a job and working in the machine you will gain knowledge on how it works and the power to change it if you should see fit.


If you want change, EARN IT. To earn it, you must put yourself in a position of power and influence. You must learn and become part of the very thing you want to change. Activism and protest is not enough. "Save the animals", "No War For Oil", and other things are nice to think about and certainly talk about, but if you are serious you will work to put yourself in a position to actually change it.

If you don't, and it doesn't, quit your bitching you damn dirt-ass.







fin

I'll sleep on everything you have written, but I have one comment right now on what seems to be the synopsis of your post:



This is a fundamental difference between Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader. Kucinich wished to change the Democrats from within the party; Nader wished to change from the outside (I take it you would side with Kucinich).

A lot of the "change within the establishment" guys are pretty famous: Teddy Roosevelt is a great example. A couple guys I see today that could work are John McCain and Russ Feingold.

As a conservative, who really agrees with liberals most of the time, I am agreeing with you. Kind of in an indirect way though.

For me, it isn't that liberals don't get off their ass and promote their beliefs, but they are a bit to extreme about them, and a bit to specific. This is a bit complicated to write, especially with a little beer down my tube, but let me try to explain

With the right, it is about promoting the economy, education, christianty, "The American Dream," doctors, corporations, the 2nd ammendment and foreign policy. These are very wide sweeping issues whether you agree with the policies or not. With the left, things get a lot more specific. It is the economy sucks, the environment, pro choice, gay marriage, anti christianity, animal rights and we are murdering people overseas. Please do not get me wrong, I know this is not the intention of the left, but the loud voices in the left are drowning out the reasonable folk.

Me for instance, I am pro choice, but I have reservations about abortion. When I hear about a shirt stating "I had an abortion" from a very popular organization in the left, I just get turned away. But I would say the average lefty, takes a particular cause and goes a bit overboard with it. For instance, I am pro environment, and I think most conservatives are, but an organization like Greenpeace makes the environmental movement look ridiculous. On another issue, I think we should be concerned about the way we are treating intelligent animals, but an organization like PETA is so repulsive and rediculous that they fuck that issue up to.

I just got off on all sort of unrelated topics let me start again. As Tsunami said, get into the system. Yes it is fucked up, but that is the place to make change. Our system, as much as some of you may hate it, does allow change. Look at the difference between Nixon, Carter, Kennedy, Reagan, and the Bush's and you can see the vast back and forth changes made in modern times. Our democracy allows for change. If you disagree with it, get yourself in a position to change minds, and fix what you believe to be wrong. Protest sighns do not do shit. The Vietnam war was not decided to be a failure by hippies, and "Give Peace a Chance," but by the mere fact that the American public saw the failures of the war, and the casualties plus a lack of progress.

I am a Jewish born, current agnostic, and I cannot even comprehend how someone could actually get offended by something like the Ten Commandments, God, or a Nativity scene. Start promoting some of the really good ideas you guys have, and stop attacking the stupid shit. I think I am to drunk to type right now, I hope some of it made sense. I'll come back tomorrow and hopefully make a more coherint arguement.

While I see merit in what you're saying, I think some clarification is needed.

I do admire the spirit of "you can change the world" and it is very American but why does one need to "become part of the system" to change the world? What about the dedicated teacher that changes the lives of her students? She may not like the way the education system is run but realizes that she's most valuable in the classroom.

or how about art and music? don't they change the world?

is Pearl Jam a good example of what you're talking about?

sorry but with all of you're talk about hippies, pot and long hair the image I get is everyone putting on a suite and a tie.

If I read Tsunami's post correctly, that teacher has become part of the system. She doesn't agree with the education system but joined it anyway to make a difference and hopefully create change. They 'system' doesn't need to be the government, it needs to be the area you feel most passionate about.

Art and music do change the world, but to use your Pearl Jam example, I would say yes, they are what she is talking about. In order to get their message out, they had to sign with a record label. They had to play in 'the man's' game to do their own thing.

Tsunami, I hope I got this correct!

Very much so, PJDoll.

Looking back on what I wrote last night, I feel the same today. This is not a call to "sell-out" or change what you believe. But it is a call to real action, not standing in a protest line, but actually getting down to the hard work of every day society and making your changes from a position in which you have the power to do so.

How are doctors, corporations, the 2nd amendment, and christianity broad issues? Especially when "anti-christianity" is a "specific issue." And pro-choice is specific vs. the broad topic of pro-life? You just listed a couple of right-wing issues, called them broad, and then called their converse specific (ie narrow minded).

There’s a lot going on with the lead post of this thread and I wanted to chime in and just make a point or two because though I’m busy, I think in some ways there is analysis which is dead-on, but other points are way off.

1) What’s up with the antagonism vs. lazy hippies? At best, this is a gross characterization. Sure, there are tons of goofs out there that literally take all their time going to protests. And in the grand scheme of things, do these protests make a difference? No, they’re largely self-assuring gestures. But it’s these voices of dissent that often lead to larger more subtle changes. If the people in say PETA weren’t so militant, would there be such a stigma against animal testing? Or if NOW weren’t so militant, would the issues of gender equality in the workplace be so important? So while there are plenty of lazy, vegetarian, long-haired dope-smoking “hippies” out there who love going to protests and in the short term these protest don’t mean much, if they touch on an important issue, the protests can be a catalyst for change.
2) This critique has nothing really to do with liberalism. I think this critique should be against lazy people. Are the goofs who go to these protests any better than the bible-thumping redneck hick who doesn’t even know who the President is, but votes for Bush because he seems Presidential? You can probably label the redneck as a conservative, but does the redneck in anyway reflect on conservatism? No, I think your issue here is with laziness. The people who enact change are ALWAYS going to be the ones who participate. Sure it’s easy for sideline stone-throwers to take pot shots as opposed to those who roll up their sleeves and get to work. And there will always be people who are disengaged for whatever reason.

So I agree that change and reform are always the product of participation and not disengagement. But I refute that this has anything to do with liberalism or that “lazy hippies” and their protests don’t accomplish anything. I think “lazy hippies” are not really lazy, but rather young and yet unencumbered by life. The hippies of the 60’s and 70’s eventually did get jobs, so too, will the “hippies” of today. They just need to grow up and realize it. I wouldn’t be so antagonistic against them because they have ideals and want to try and make it work. It’s an age old paradigm of youth. Just a few passing thoughts.

Exactly, well put.

I certainly don't believe change to the establishment is restricted to being a part of the establishment itself. Certainly, you are able to make change much easier when you are integrated within the establishment, however a lot of the most worthwhile things in the development of our country were done by the oppressed, and people outside the establishment influence. The black slaves who rose up against their masters and government for their freedom. Women who were infuriated with inequality and earned their right to vote. Howard Zinn has written some great books documenting the oppressed people and the underclass rising up against establishment and power to overcome, even against overwhelming odds. A Peoples History Of The United States (if you havnt read it) is a great read.

Those people did organize and speak out, but it was ultimately the decision of the government (the establishment) which set the laws and made the change. It was the people in charge who had the power to change things as they saw fit. People can speak out and should, but change occurs when you have the power and position to do so. The lowest level is of course, the vote. We all start there. To make bigger differences, however, we must gain more power than just that.

I would agree that womens' rights has come ultimately from the rising up of women until the establishment could no longer ignore them. But slavery was completely different. Nothing any slave ever did contributed to their freedom. If it weren't for the moral outrage of many of those in the establishment, there would still be slavery. The civil rights movement on the other hand was a good example of an uprising largely outside of the establishment.

--PunkDavid

I think you're overlooking the obvious here
The people really do have the power. The only reason change was made was because the people protested and spoke out. The slaves were freed because they revolted, not because a few people in power randomly decided they should be freed. The slaves FORCED change upon the powers that be. That's the whole point of protest. And it worked, and continues to work on many levels in this country. There will always be an establishment of some kind. Anti-establishment movements dont usually seek to overthrow them (there are extreme cases in history, however), but rather to effect change within the establishment. I dont want to bring down the government when I protest something, I just want to CHANGE something. And it works as history has proven repeatedly.

I know you haven't had a chance to read my above response yet, but you're wrong about this one. The slaves didn't do shit. They were in fact freed because a few people in power decided they should be freed. No slave revolt ever accomplished anything besides getting a bunch of slaves killed.

--PunkDavid

Alright, let's be honest - we're talking about hippies here

I would agree with that in part. There certainly was an uproar within the establishment itself, but the salves also did play a major role in securing their own freedom. I would disagree that they did nothing, and that there would still be slavery today. There were certainly many factors though. Not simply their own uprising did the trick, I would agree.

for whatever it's worth, i used to consider myself ultra-liberal as well, including on economic issues. i was keeping company with socialists and other like-minded folks.

then i changed my major to economics and was forced to actually consider and realize the ramifications of such beliefs. i am forever grateful for the change, because it gave me a whole new way to look at things and think about things.

now i am completely comfortable with my middle ground - fairly socially liberal and as fiscally conservative as i can be.



couldn't agree more.



yep. i'm guilty as charged.

I think we are quite similar, with you having discovered this years earlier than I.

in that case, let me welcome you to the libertarian party.

Good post tsunami. I agree with nearly everything