Chris Hedges: America is a Tinderbox

[mick063]

61. Perhaps unrelated to your post, but it inspired some thinking

Two forms of "concrete activity" are not given their proper due.

Conveying ideas to a large group. Easier to do now than in anytime in history.

Reaching consensus and voting as a block. Easier to do now, than in anytime in history.

I don't underestimate the power that induced the Arab Spring or coordinated Occupy. Modern technology has rendered old style politics obsolete. Indeed, politics have not kept up with technology, especially on the GOP side, and the most recent Presidential campaign indicated that the campaign which was the most "tech savvy" was at least on equal footing with the campaign that featured unparalleled campaign spending by conservative "SuperPACs", saturating every available media.

The argument should be about if the intended audience is being reached. For example, if the purpose is to persuade others, DU is not the appropriate place. Most here are fairly aligned.

Establishing networks can now be done at the speed of a keyboard. Talent to make a persuasive argument without putting an audience on the defensive remains the same "difference maker" talent, whether it is campaigning done the old or new ways.

There are parallels to be drawn. One can argue that if someone were to visit DU, for example, they have already reached a verdict on how they will vote. On the other hand, the same can be said about someone that would fight traffic and crowds to see a candidate in person. If they were willing to endure the inconvenience, they are likely to vote for that person. In both cases, it is more a case of "rallying troops" as opposed to expanding reach.

In the end, it will simply take dissatisfaction on a large scale to sway the vote. We can all "organize" ourselves into exhaustion, but there must be a catalyst to tempt folks to lend an ear. One can go as far as to say that in good times, apathy rules the day. Large swaths of the population will not demand change when their standard of living is comfortable. It is the reason why incumbency is so incredibly powerful. There are, however, enough "ALEC style" policies in place where impending economic calamity is almost a certainty. The progressive movement must be ready to pounce when that time arrives. Unfortunately, if this impending calamity occurs before the current administration is out of power, the Democratic party will be set back by a significant margin.

The final piece of the puzzle is of voters weighting a narrow band of issues. "Guns and God" is an incredibly powerful asset in many regions of the country. Only when economic disparity gains equal footing, will conservative influence be significantly diminished. Hedges makes this argument. Hedges puts emphasis on the proper message for change. The message that must be elevated to find a place in the narrow "issue set" that is dominating modern politics.