Incrimentalism? I ain't got time for that.

[Kelvin Mace]

A confession:

Once upon a time I was an incrementalist. A pragmatist. A person who believed you had to work within the system to change the system. I was also a Catholic who believed that I could work within the Church to change its culture to a more enlightened and liberal viewpoint.

Then two things happened.

The child molestation scandal exploded and I saw the vile perversity that the Church "leaders" had been hiding and perpetuating for centuries.

Around the same time I read a biography of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, who also found himself confronting an ethical and moral crisis on the question of whether to oppose slavery in a pragmatic, moderate and incremental manner, or to adopt a radical and "unrealistic" attitude toward the problem.

I quote the words that leapt off the page and set a fire in my soul:

In Park-street Church, on the Fourth of July, 1829, in an address on slavery, I unreflectingly assented to the popular but pernicious doctrine of gradual abolition. I seize this opportunity to make a full and unequivocal recantation, and thus publicly to ask pardon of my God, of my country, and of my brethren the poor slaves, for having uttered a sentiment so full of timidity, injustice and absurdity. A similar recantation, from my pen, was published in the Genius of Universal Emancipation at Baltimore, in September, 1829. My con-science is now satisfied.

I am aware, that many object to the severity of my language; but is there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or speak, or write, with moderation. No! no! Tell a man whose house is on fire, to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; —but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest—I will not equivocate—I will not excuse—I will not retreat a single inch—AND I WILL BE HEARD. The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal, and to hasten the resurrection of the dead.

At that point I realized that by trying to engage the Church on its own terms, by its own rules, not only was I doomed to accomplish nothing, but I became an accomplice to the evil that it did by lending it the legitimacy of my society, minor though it may be. By attending any service, donating any money, I was enabling the molestation of children, and the oppression of women, lesbians, gays and trans individuals who suffered at the hands of their "teaching".

This I would no longer do.

I unequivocally broke with the church, and over the course of years, left religion behind entirely.

Today I hear the same arguments being made in this election. I am told that I must be pragmatic, realistic and sensible. I must vote for the one candidate who, despite their "faults", is the only one who can "win in November". If I refuse to support that person, then I doom us all to a much worse fate. They agree with me that change is needed, but admonish me that change takes time, and I have to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Now is a time for action, not starry-eyed dreams. Yet their "action" is to support a policy of gradualism that has done nothing but merely slow down this country's march to the right. My guy can't win, they tell me, because his policies and plans will never be accepted by "the people" because they are "too radical". If I refuse to vote for the incremental status quo, I am throwing women, children, minorities, gays, lesbians, trans people, et al, to a Randian dystopia AND IT WILL BE ALL MY FAULT.

No. It will not.

The time for radical change is now. And it is our last chance. The reality is that this country is hurtling toward the abyss at 60 mph with a hundred feet to go. We have a choice of two drivers:

One will gently apply the brakes, and drive us over the edge at a more restrained 45 mph.

The other will jam on the brakes, and slam the transmission into reverse.

The rest of the country will pick between one of these two, and a driver who will stomp the accelerator, hit the nitrous booster and light the JATO rockets.

Of these three choices, only one driver has any chance of keeping the country alive. The other two mean certain death.

Think I am exaggerating?

Well the "live or die" issue of our time is not campaign finance reform, not marriage equality, gun control, abortion rights or income inequality.

It is global warming.

After decades of warning people that we were approaching the point of no return, we have now either reached it, or passed it. Ahead lies mass extinction, famine, pestilence, and war on a cataclysmic scale.

Our choice of candidates, as "Democrats/Liberals/Progressives" is simple:

The person who will take radical measures to cut carbon emissions and build a green energy infrastructure, or the person who will compromise and only implement realistic plans with consensus "buy in" from the relevant stake holders.

The first person will probably fail, but might, just might succeed.

The second person will fail, PERIOD.

And that, my friends, is what is on the line. After the primary we will either choose between two candidates who will both drive us into abyss, or one who will drive into the abyss with maniacal glee and one who will do his damndest to stop on the edge.

I refuse to be blamed if you pick wrong.

[onecaliberal]

1. Indeed.

[farleftlib]

2. Bra-vo!

What an amazing post. My wake-up call about the Catholic Church was almost exactly the same. And the logic certainly carries through to the moral imperative of the election season we find ourselves in.

K & R to the nth degree.

[Kelvin Mace]

5. I love how some people on this board

sneer at the mention of oing what is moral and just. Apparently, such things are a "luxury".

[Shandris]

3. The time for radical change is now. And it is our last chance.

An excellent quote. It most certainly is our last chance. Social media as it exists now won't in four years if we fail (and while I consider a goodly portion of that a good thing, the communicative power of social media is presently performing its intended function, but not for much longer). The Establishment only needs to survive one more election for it to clamp down and finish off the internet's usefulness forever. Already it is becoming a useless invention to normal people as more and more of it is rearranged behind legal barriers and paywalls and endless datamining with the sole goal of muddying up literally every source of information on planet Earth. And this one threat in nearly a century to their uncontested rule WILL NOT go unanswered.

No more increments. How many lifetimes am I expected to wait?

The only thing 'incrementally' happening is that my country is being stripped of its resources by the global elite, our homes and land are being bought up by investors attached to the global elite, Wall Street is attempting to finish pulling up the ladder of business to protect the global elite, and more and more of our arable farm land 'just happens' to keep falling under one corporate project or government project or another, removing the control of the private food supply.

Yeah, I can't imagine ANY reasons why those would be a bad sign. But hey, if we wait another hundred years, I might get the luxury of reading a college textbook for free!

...so long as it's over 180 years old, natch.

[farleftlib]

4. A post caucus kick

for a darn good read.

[pdsimdars]

6. We're tired of waiting . . . . .

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. Thank you!

The stake are huge because the straits are dire. We are out of time!!!

[Kelvin Mace]

8. I really don't understand how their tactic

of burning bridges, poisoning wells, and salting the land is going to help if HRC does win.

Apparently they think they don't need the very people they are alienating to win, or the they think that "You have to vote for us or we'll blame you for losing" is a winning strategy.

[Adrahil]

9. Then get used to disappointment.

That's not a judgement, just an assessment.

[Kelvin Mace]

10. Yes, the planet burning in its own waste heat

is very disappointing.

[Adrahil]

11. Short of bullets and guillotines, I don't see radical change happening.

If you want it to happen, I'm all ears. As the Beatles say, "we'd all love to see the plan."

[Kelvin Mace]

12. Before we have to resort to revolution

there is still one chance. Don't vote for the corporate candidate who is guaranteed to fail. Vote for the one who will at least try. If he fails, then revisit your options.

Also, not all revolutions are violent.