so much wrong with one sentence, heh

"America is an idea—one that has endured and evolved through war and depression, prevailed over fascism and communism, and radiated hope to far distant corners of the earth."

This is the first sentence from the Preamble of the 2020 Democratic Party platform.

"America is an idea"?

No, America is a hemisphere, the so-called Western Hemisphere.  America is two continents, North America and South America, along with some nearby islands.  I try my best not to refer to the United States of America as "America", nor to its residents as "Americans", because doing so erases the rest of our hemisphere and its residents, who are also part of America, who are also Americans.  Brazilians are Americans.  Hatians are Americans.  It's as if Swiss acted like they were the only Europeans, or Mongolians acted like they were the only Asians.

I can't imagine a person living on the continent of Asia saying, "Asia is an idea."  So what's going on with this opening statement?

Why did the residents of the US take up this verbal tic of referring to ourselves as America?  Because of our 19th Century propaganda in favor of Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine.  How is it that the original 13 colonies on the Eastern Seaboard expanded all the way to the Pacific?  Hint, some wars were involved.  And to the extent we didn't conquer the entire Western Hemisphere, we claimed the rest of the Americas as a US-only imperialism zone -- no European imperialism would be allowed in "our" hemisphere.

During the 19th and 20th Centuries the US intervened in Chile, Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Columbia, Panama, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Guyana, El Salvador, and Grenada.  Some of these countries were invaded multiple times by the US.  Oh, yeah, we also invaded Canada in 1812!

When you use the word "America" to represent the US, you are standing proudly upon two centuries of military intervention by the US throughout the entire Western Hemisphere.  You are implicitly adopting 19th Century propaganda calling for the US to control as much territory in the Americas as possible, while reserving the right to intervene in the internal affairs of any American country, while denying any such right to European powers.

That's the idea of America.

-----

Moving beyond the Western Hemisphere, how exactly did we "prevail over fascism and communism"?  By fighting a global war against Germany & Japan during WW2, and then another set of global interventions against the Soviet Union & China during the so-called Cold War.  If the 19th Century was about Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine in the Western Hemisphere, the 20th Century was about creating a globe-spanning military and economic empire with enough power to impose and enforce universal global Dollar capitalism.

And what does it mean to "radiate hope to far distant corners of the earth"?  This must be our 21st Century Global War on Terrorism, in which we reserve the right to bomb or invade any country on the planet if it harbors any group that we determine to be "terrorist".  Any group that dares to oppose our universal global Dollar capitalism by fighting for some other way of life.

-----

This is your idea of America?  A globe-spanning superpower that imposes its rule on everybody else via military and economic coercion?  I think your idea sucks.  I'm not sure why I should continue reading your stupid platform.

something the Left often forgets nowadays

White men are part of the 99% also, part of the working class also, part of those who "confront corporate power when they fight for equality on the job and in their communities" also.

When you're aiming for inclusivity, don't forget to include white men.

Yeah, yeah, there's plenty of white men in positions of corporate and political power. But there's even more white men who are not in positions of power. Those are the people I don't want the Left to forget. Most white men are not in positions of power.

I was talking with a friend the other day, he's a white guy. He donates time and money to a local volunteer organization. He told me one of the leaders of the organization, a woman, asked him if he was interested in joining their board. At first he deferred, saying, "I'm a white guy, the last thing you want on your board is another white guy."

She disagreed, "No, we're having trouble finding white guys to join our board nowadays. They're all saying what you just said. I think you'd be a great addition to our board."

It seems we're training an entire generation of white men on the Left to shut up and sit down, when we need everybody on board if the Left is to start solving our problems. Diversity means white men also. Diversity means everybody is represented.

And so long as I'm preaching diversity here, don't forget to include Christians. Jesus said a lot of things that folks on the Left would agree with:

For I was hungry, and you gave me food to eat. I was thirsty, and you gave me drink. I was a stranger, and you took me in. I was naked, and you clothed me. I was sick, and you visited me. I was in prison, and you came to me.

So let's not rule out Christians when building our coalitions on the Left.  Diversity means everybody is represented.

-----

And here's when I go all the way:

A lot of people who consider themselves to be conservatives or Republicans, they still share some of the goals of the Left.  Some conservatives care deeply about immigration reform, others care deeply about the environment.  Some conservatives think rich people should pay higher taxes, others think we should increase the minimum wage.

There are pro-choice conservatives.  There are LGBT conservatives.  There are POC conservatives.  There are definitely women conservatives.

Instead of treating conservatives as an implacable bloc of opposing interests, the Left can work with individual conservatives on individual issues, to build shifting majorities in favor of Left issues, shifting majorities that include different sets of conservatives, depending on the issue.

Diversity means: including conservatives.  Diversity means everybody is represented.  Even the people you disagree with on one issue or another.

-----

Diversity means: including police officers, and border police.  The last time I paid attention to a Democratic Socialists of America leadership election, the biggest drama was the discovery that one of the candidates for the board had, OMG, once been a police officer.  People were irate, they called it a "cover up".  The candidate stepped down over the furor.  How dare a former police officer run for a leadership position with the DSA!?!?!

If we really believe in the 99%, we've got to include all 99%.  That means including every family who earned less than $400,000 last year.  Even if they're white, even if they're conservative, even if they're police officers, even if they're Christians.  If you really believe in the 99% taking on the corporate interests that are destroying the planet while increasing inequality, you need to figure out how to make common cause with as many people in the 99% as you can.

Wednesday stuff

Middle of the work week, plugging away at stuff during work hours, exercising, doing chores, cooking dinner, conversations with T, doing the monthly bills.  Tonight I'm helping T with a job application.  He's got a job, and pretty much likes it, but he's looking for a promotion.

Not sure what is going on this weekend yet.  T has no plans yet (B still mysteriously delays spending time with either of us).  Haven't discussed condo time with K yet.  After last Friday's morning blowup ... I dunno ... I probably need some Time to Self when I'm neither pissed off nor anxious about T being pissed off.  I do have some new toys to play with.  We'll see.  It's not like I'm juggling a busy social life.  It's either the house with T or the condo, and at the condo it's either Time to Self or a date with K.  At the house I try to exercise on most days.  At the condo I might exercise, but I definitely get to screensave porn and play with toys.  If I were at the house on the weekend I'd probably play some Gloomhaven solitaire.

I was hoping to take an entire week off in September, but work stuff is making that look impossible :-(  I may try to turn Labor Day into a 5-day weekend.

No 2020 Republican platform

For the first time in its history, the Republican Party has decided not to adopt a platform in 2020. The Republican Party had previously adopted a platform during every Presidential campaign since 1856, but this year, nope. No platform!

Instead, we got this resolution from the Republican National Convention:

"RESOLVED, That the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda;"

That's all, folks.  We support the President!  Otherwise, we really don't care.  Whatever Trump decides he wants, we enthusiastically support it.  That has been and will continue to be our platform.

-----

Way back in 1856, the brand new Republican Party adopted a platform that opposed both the extension of slavery into new territories, and the legalization of polygamy in those territories.  They called slavery and polygamy: "those twin relics of barbarism".

I was aware the Republican Party was formed to oppose slavery, I wasn't aware that it was also against polygamy, LOL.  As a 21st Century poly dude I object!

Way back then, during the 19th Century, the US was still trying to figure out what exactly to do with all that territory it had conquered between the Appalachian Mountains and the Pacific Ocean.  Over time, new states were carved from this territory, but meanwhile there was a bunch of territory that had not yet been organized into states.  Which laws should prevail inside these non-state lands?  Southerners wanted to extend slavery to these territories, but Republicans didn't.

Most of the rest of the 1856 Republican platform was a list of complaints about the atrocities that occurred in Kansas as slavery supporters and opposers duked it out both violently, and nonviolently via fraudulent elections.  They also supported building a transcontinental railroad, and waterway improvements -- stuff we'd call "infrastructure" these days.

That was it, a fairly simple platform.  We dislike slavery and polygamy, we want Kansas to become a Free State, and we want more infrastructure.  Politics was simpler way back then, heh.

Republicans lost in 1856, but four years later they won, and then the country immediately split into two.  Because half the country (the Democrats) wanted to keep slavery, while the other half (the Republicans) wanted to get rid of it.

-----

Just for kicks, what did the 1856 Democratic Party platform say about slavery?

That Congress has no power to interfere with slavery.  That fugitive slaves would be returned to their owners.  That further attempts by "sectional" parties to interfere with slavery in the states and territories would lead to civil war.

Yes, the Democrats went there, they threatened civil war over the issue of slavery.  A threat they intended to carry out.  A threat they did carry out.

The Democratic platform was silent on polygamy, LOL.