Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
TBF
TBF's Journal
TBF's Journal
October 20, 2015
"The enlightened socialism and political passion of Stieg Larsson is not possible to fake.” These are the concluding thoughts of an article in one of Sweden’s largest liberal newspapers discussing the publication of a fourth book in Larsson’s Millennium series.
Stieg didn’t write the book, of course — his life was cut short by a heart attack in 2004. Instead a new author penned the additional volume, much to the consternation of Stieg’s companion of thirty-five years, Eva Gabrielsson, his personal friends, and others who have accused the project of being grotesque, immoral, and plain “grave robbery.”
Norstedts, the publishing house, contends that it is not unusual for a new writer to continue the work of a popular series of novels — the Millennium books have sold 80 million copies, the largest circulation of any Swedish author. Together with the films, the “Millennium industry” has yielded roughly $500 million, with about $60 million going to Stieg’s father and brother.
But Stieg was not just an author of popular detective novels. He was a socialist activist and throughout his short life fought racism, sexism, and social injustice. “The commercialization of Stieg’s work goes against everything he stood for,” says Gabrielsson ...
Much more here - https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/10/stieg-larsson-girl-with-dragon-tattoo-millennium-eva-gabrielsson/
The Man Behind the Dragon Tattoo
Former Internationalen editor Håkan Blomqvist on the socialist politics of his colleague Stieg Larsson.
by Håkan Blomqvist 10-20-15
Stieg’s last article for Internationalen in 1988 — entitled “Glasnost in the streets of Moscow. Like a warm wind” — expressed the Trotskyist hope for democratic socialism in Soviet Union. Socialistiska partiet and its predecessors had always supported radical democratic movements in the Eastern bloc, from the Prague Spring of 1968 to clandestine Soviet trade unions and Solidarnosc in Poland.
"The enlightened socialism and political passion of Stieg Larsson is not possible to fake.” These are the concluding thoughts of an article in one of Sweden’s largest liberal newspapers discussing the publication of a fourth book in Larsson’s Millennium series.
Stieg didn’t write the book, of course — his life was cut short by a heart attack in 2004. Instead a new author penned the additional volume, much to the consternation of Stieg’s companion of thirty-five years, Eva Gabrielsson, his personal friends, and others who have accused the project of being grotesque, immoral, and plain “grave robbery.”
Norstedts, the publishing house, contends that it is not unusual for a new writer to continue the work of a popular series of novels — the Millennium books have sold 80 million copies, the largest circulation of any Swedish author. Together with the films, the “Millennium industry” has yielded roughly $500 million, with about $60 million going to Stieg’s father and brother.
But Stieg was not just an author of popular detective novels. He was a socialist activist and throughout his short life fought racism, sexism, and social injustice. “The commercialization of Stieg’s work goes against everything he stood for,” says Gabrielsson ...
Much more here - https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/10/stieg-larsson-girl-with-dragon-tattoo-millennium-eva-gabrielsson/
October 18, 2015
Vonnegut had a knack for seeing, and pointing out, those things that are right in front of us but that we manage to ignore. Although his writing was often off the wall and outlandish, this was generally coupled with a simple moral lesson. Vonnegut did not write large heavily-symbolic theses on life and humanity, he wrote disjointed observations loosely connected by a plot. However, these observations were, for many people, deeply morally affecting.
Most of his books concern death, tragedy, and madness, and a fair few focus on the end of the world. Often he ascribed this to the mistakes of science. Vonnegut was trying to cut through all the bullshit that surrounds how we live our lives and ask if any of it was really helping people. Why is the atom bomb scientific progress? If it is progress then what good is it for us? Wouldn’t it just be much easier if we turned our attention to helping each other?
A lot is currently being made of Vonnegut’s famous humanism. Certainly the moral of much of his work seems focussed on the innate goodness of humanity, despite the tragedy and horror we inflict on ourselves. He succeeded Isaac Asimov as the President of the American Humanist Association.
But we should also remember that Vonnegut was, in his own peculiar way, a socialist. He named characters after the great early US socialist leader (and fellow native of Indiana) Eugene Debs. He also named characters after Leon Trotsky. He would quote Debs in his novels. (But then Debs made some great speeches: “As long as there is a lower class, I am in it. As long as there is a criminal element, I’m of it. As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free.” ...
More here: http://www.workersliberty.org/node/8232
"So it goes"
A brief interlude from the wars in GD: P as I am thinking of our comrade and brother Kurt Vonnegut, who I'm sure would be quite interested in our election this cycle.
“The year was 2081, and everyone was finally equal.” Kurt Vonnegut’s prediction for the future.
Vonnegut had a knack for seeing, and pointing out, those things that are right in front of us but that we manage to ignore. Although his writing was often off the wall and outlandish, this was generally coupled with a simple moral lesson. Vonnegut did not write large heavily-symbolic theses on life and humanity, he wrote disjointed observations loosely connected by a plot. However, these observations were, for many people, deeply morally affecting.
Most of his books concern death, tragedy, and madness, and a fair few focus on the end of the world. Often he ascribed this to the mistakes of science. Vonnegut was trying to cut through all the bullshit that surrounds how we live our lives and ask if any of it was really helping people. Why is the atom bomb scientific progress? If it is progress then what good is it for us? Wouldn’t it just be much easier if we turned our attention to helping each other?
A lot is currently being made of Vonnegut’s famous humanism. Certainly the moral of much of his work seems focussed on the innate goodness of humanity, despite the tragedy and horror we inflict on ourselves. He succeeded Isaac Asimov as the President of the American Humanist Association.
But we should also remember that Vonnegut was, in his own peculiar way, a socialist. He named characters after the great early US socialist leader (and fellow native of Indiana) Eugene Debs. He also named characters after Leon Trotsky. He would quote Debs in his novels. (But then Debs made some great speeches: “As long as there is a lower class, I am in it. As long as there is a criminal element, I’m of it. As long as there is a soul in prison, I am not free.” ...
More here: http://www.workersliberty.org/node/8232
October 17, 2015
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-raised-phenomenal-3-2-million-3-days.html
#BernieOrBust
Bernie IS Phenomenal: $3.2 Million In Less Than 3 Days
I am SO sick of the concern troll and nervous nellies frequenting our group the past couple of days. Hillary has the votes of the overpaid corporate media, but the people love BERNIE:
Bernie Sanders Has Raised A Phenomenal $3.2 Million In Less Than 3 Days
By: Jason Easley more from Jason Easley
Thursday, October 15th, 2015, 9:31 pm
The Democratic debate as energized Bernie Sanders supporters as the Democratic candidate raised an amazing $3.2 million in three days this week all from small donors.
According to the Sanders campaign:
And in a remarkable turn of events, there has been a record surge in online donations this week. More than 97,800 contributions poured in totaling some $3.2 million since Tuesday, when the first Democratic debate was held in Las Vegas, through mid-afternoon on Thursday. The average donation $32.28.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-raised-phenomenal-3-2-million-3-days.html
#BernieOrBust
October 16, 2015
@BernTherapy on Twitter - if you didn't know about this page you do now!! ETA link: https://twitter.com/berntherapy
Happy Friday
#Bern Therapy
@BernTherapy on Twitter - if you didn't know about this page you do now!! ETA link: https://twitter.com/berntherapy
Happy Friday
October 14, 2015
Immediately after the Democratic presidential debate last night, Van Jones offered two astute observations: “class won,” as did Black Lives Matter. The former, of course, was the triumph of the Sanders campaign (although it was actually former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb who inaugurated the debate’s discursive revolution by beginning with “working people” rather than “middle class”) while the latter is a tribute to the thousands who have so doggedly stayed in the streets and rudely interrupted political business as usual.
Angry passion and insubordination joined together can succeed as can Old Testament wrath in the case of our guy from Vermont. For the first time since the election of Ronald Reagan, the continuous Republican rightward shift has not been mirrored by a Democratic accommodation to its premises.
<snip>
And no one since Upton Sinclair has framed “democratic socialism” — as the restoration of the working class’s “fair share” in the national income — in such a commonsensical and compelling way. Likewise, his crusade for free public higher education is a radical “transitional demand” with more resonance among youth and young adults than any other proposal yet presented ...
More here - https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/10/hillary-clinton-bernie-democratic-presidential-debate/
A Progressive or a Radical?
by Mike Davis 10/14/15
Sander is a great economist populist, but not an anti-imperialist. However, in my view, this is only a more urgent reason to become involved in the Sanders campaign and criticize it from the inside, as supporters.
Immediately after the Democratic presidential debate last night, Van Jones offered two astute observations: “class won,” as did Black Lives Matter. The former, of course, was the triumph of the Sanders campaign (although it was actually former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb who inaugurated the debate’s discursive revolution by beginning with “working people” rather than “middle class”) while the latter is a tribute to the thousands who have so doggedly stayed in the streets and rudely interrupted political business as usual.
Angry passion and insubordination joined together can succeed as can Old Testament wrath in the case of our guy from Vermont. For the first time since the election of Ronald Reagan, the continuous Republican rightward shift has not been mirrored by a Democratic accommodation to its premises.
<snip>
And no one since Upton Sinclair has framed “democratic socialism” — as the restoration of the working class’s “fair share” in the national income — in such a commonsensical and compelling way. Likewise, his crusade for free public higher education is a radical “transitional demand” with more resonance among youth and young adults than any other proposal yet presented ...
More here - https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/10/hillary-clinton-bernie-democratic-presidential-debate/
October 14, 2015
Tuesday Night Football: post-debate thoughts from Jacobin
by Editors at Jacobin Mag (https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/10/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-debate/)
Sanders’s didn’t shrink from the term democratic socialist — he embraced it and called for a political revolution, not once, but throughout the debate.
Clinton resorted to red-baiting in record time.
O’Malley seemed content to play back-up singer for Sanders
Lincoln Chafee is pretty cute, though. I hope someone takes him home and adopts him.
My main takeaway from the debate is that I’m pretty terrified of Jim Webb. He seems like the type of guy who has a bunker in Montana stocked with preserved food and hand grenades.
October 14, 2015
Changing my home page to the Chicago Tribune -
really sick of looking at photos of Hillary on the NYTimes. They do say "he probably can't get elected president" but I think they're wrong about that. They sum up his connection with the people nicely though (and that's the reason I think he can win!):
Here is the story from the Trib (you may have to register to see it): http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-democratic-debate-clinton-sanders-edit-1014-20151013-story.html
Editorial: Bernie Sanders' night: Authenticity wins the Democratic debate
Democrats have a surprisingly competitive race for their presidential nomination, and if you watched their announced candidates debate Tuesday night, you saw why. Not because the candidates, like their Republican counterparts, spent much time and effort attacking one another; they didn't. And not because Hillary Rodham Clinton suffered grievous wounds or damaged her standing; she didn't.
No, what came closest to electrifying the night was a Vermont senator, a self-described democratic socialist who honeymooned in the Soviet Union, and who probably can't get elected president. Bernie Sanders demonstrated time and again Tuesday night why he's the force vector in this race. If you watched, you now know why he attracts the huge crowds, the money, the energy of rank-and-file Democrats — a party to which he doesn't even belong.
You also know why he gives Clinton conniptions. While she behaved like the front-runner — confident, competent, comfortable — Sanders was connecting with the audience. He even managed to profit from a Clinton problem while tacitly excusing her from it: "The American people," he said, "are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!" Sanders wanted to talk about issues that trouble Americans.
Chicago Tribute, October 13, 2015
October 12, 2015
Hillary and Julian - new photo
Yes, I'm still supporting Bernie. But I've long been a fan of Julian locally and the news of a rally supporting Hillary came across facebook. I don't want to paste identifying info (for my own account) so just go to his public page on Facebook. It's the top post - you can't miss it.
The rally is Oct. 15th in San Antonio.
October 10, 2015
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, SARAH COHEN and KAREN YOURISH
OCT. 10, 2015
They are overwhelmingly white, rich, older and male, in a nation that is being remade by the young, by women, and by black and brown voters. Across a sprawling country, they reside in an archipelago of wealth, exclusive neighborhoods dotting a handful of cities and towns. And in an economy that has minted billionaires in a dizzying array of industries, most made their fortunes in just two: finance and energy.
Now they are deploying their vast wealth in the political arena, providing almost half of all the seed money raised to support Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, according to a New York Times investigation. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago.
These donors’ fortunes reflect the shifting composition of the country’s economic elite. Relatively few work in the traditional ranks of corporate America, or hail from dynasties of inherited wealth. Most built their own businesses, parlaying talent and an appetite for risk into huge wealth: They founded hedge funds in New York, bought up undervalued oil leases in Texas, made blockbusters in Hollywood. More than a dozen of the elite donors were born outside the United States, immigrating from countries like Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Pakistan, India and Israel ...
Much more here (this is fascinating - after clicking on the link scroll down past the photo to get to the text): http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
They all live in close proximity to the River Oaks Country Club (these are the 8 families in Houston - $$$ from Energy - they give to Republicans):
Many of the families live in Texas and Florida.
Two of the donors live on Indian Creek Island Road in Florida, the most expensive street in the United States, according to Zillow:
158 Families calling the shots
Two-thirds of Americans support higher taxes on those earning $1 million or more a year, according to a June New York Times/CBS News poll, while six in 10 favor more government intervention to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. According to the Pew Research Center, nearly seven in 10 favor preserving Social Security and Medicare benefits as they are.
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, SARAH COHEN and KAREN YOURISH
OCT. 10, 2015
They are overwhelmingly white, rich, older and male, in a nation that is being remade by the young, by women, and by black and brown voters. Across a sprawling country, they reside in an archipelago of wealth, exclusive neighborhoods dotting a handful of cities and towns. And in an economy that has minted billionaires in a dizzying array of industries, most made their fortunes in just two: finance and energy.
Now they are deploying their vast wealth in the political arena, providing almost half of all the seed money raised to support Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, contributed $176 million in the first phase of the campaign, according to a New York Times investigation. Not since before Watergate have so few people and businesses provided so much early money in a campaign, most of it through channels legalized by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision five years ago.
These donors’ fortunes reflect the shifting composition of the country’s economic elite. Relatively few work in the traditional ranks of corporate America, or hail from dynasties of inherited wealth. Most built their own businesses, parlaying talent and an appetite for risk into huge wealth: They founded hedge funds in New York, bought up undervalued oil leases in Texas, made blockbusters in Hollywood. More than a dozen of the elite donors were born outside the United States, immigrating from countries like Cuba, the old Soviet Union, Pakistan, India and Israel ...
Much more here (this is fascinating - after clicking on the link scroll down past the photo to get to the text): http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
They all live in close proximity to the River Oaks Country Club (these are the 8 families in Houston - $$$ from Energy - they give to Republicans):
Many of the families live in Texas and Florida.
Two of the donors live on Indian Creek Island Road in Florida, the most expensive street in the United States, according to Zillow:
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: Wisconsin
Current location: Tejas
Member since: Thu Jan 17, 2008, 01:44 PM
Number of posts: 32,090
