A Few Bruised in See-at-ul
I was listening to Crosby Stills Nash & Young’s “(Four Dead in) Ohio” yesterday and was inspired to write the following parody, updated for the WTO fiasco in Seattle.
“A Few Bruised in Seattle”
Dim lefties with PC slogans
Have finally got a cause of their own
Unlike Ohio, they won’t see battle
Just a few bruised in See-at-tul
Gotta get down to it
TV crews are all around
Better put on quite a show
What if the news teams get
Bored with the march they have found?
How will their ratings ever grow?
Dim lefties with paint can spray
Are ruining Starbucks’ day
But the real Powers remain unrattled
By a few bruises in See-at-tul.
RE: This week’s Poll
I’m writing concerning your current poll. I couldn’t help noticing that the Caucasion woman option is winning by a large margin; however, I feel it should be pointed out that chimp is the right answer — we elected one in 1980.
I wanted to participate in your survey, but I realized that it has a potential problem. The problem is that chances are that we have already had a “gay man” as president. I just figured that this was the case and it made your survey a little skewed.
Durst Makes It All Worthwhile
You folks have made my day, with the Durst list of 100 “things.” I laughed so hard I had tears in my eyes. Everyone should make such good lists…and it all wouldn’t be such a bore.
Taking Money from The Man
RE: Shell Banner Ads
I think it’s fine to have ads from Shell, but not like the ones running on the MoJo Wire, which can be misleading about Shell’s past. An ad where Shell apologizes — now that would be an ad worth running.
Unless links to the ed note about the shell ads, or to balancing Shell-exposing articles, are right next to the ads, it would be possible for someone visiting the mother jones site to interpret the ads as an endorsement, or as a way of saying that Shell has redeemed itself for its past misdeeds (and is now a “good” company, or that the boycott should stop). Considering I haven’t yet seen Shell even acknowledge the extent of its actions in the past against human rights & the environment, I find it unlikely that they’ve changed so much to be worth forgiving.
Bushes Not the Only Crooks
RE: “Bush Family Value$”
I would like to know if you are equally enthusiastic in researching the thugs and felons who continue to surround the Clintons. Are you going to publish an article on the financing of the new Clinton home in New York, about cattle futures, about links between the Communist Chinese and Clinton presidential campaign funding, or about the myriad of other dubious dealings associated with the Clintons? I predict that one day, history will record that the Clinton presidency was the most corrupt administration in the history of this country, bar none.
David L. Taylor
Durst Lost in the ’80s
The main problem I have with all these millenium lists we’re seeing lately is that they’re all heavily skewed toward recent history. This is what I call the “Best Christmas Ever” syndrome. Every year some little brat who wasn’t even alive in 1970 announces: “This is the best Christmas Ever!”
Sadly, your list displays the same sort of regional favoritism and historical short sightedness. I mean come on, Will…SIX of the 1980s? In the top 60?? I know that’s when you were penning some of your best jokes — stuff like “Women Eat Toilet Paper” and “Ring Toss For Aliens”) — but I’ve got a news flash for you: most of the rest of us we’re not that impressed with with the 1980s.
The Battle of Seattle Rages On
The Vietnam era was a watershed time for change. The protests against our involvement were ineffective until two things occurred. The first was that “middle America’s” sons started coming home in body bags. The other significant occurrence was the veterans themselves. As time passed from 1965, more and more of them were disillusioned by what they had seen and done in Vietnam to the extent that they started agreeing with and joining the protesters’ organizations. They also formed one of their own: Vietnam Veterans Against The War. These forces eventually forced the United States government to change its policy toward Vietnam in fundamental ways.
The same “sea change” of social attitudes is going to have to happen regarding the WTO and our efforts to change American attitudes toward it. Until some “veterans” of the corporate evils in the name of fair and global trade come forward and insert themselves into the fight against this body, there will be no progress. The protesters were depicted by the WTO media lackeys as a bunch of freaked out radicals.
Right now, middle America is winning in every way because of globalization. WalMarts are bursting at the seams with cheap goods, trailer house manufacturers are selling their answer to the housing shortage as fast as they can be built, tobacco exports are at record highs: all is right with the world and Americans are happy. Until some thing or idea can get through to these people that “now” is not “forever,” there is no hope of changing the fundamental attitudes of those who are needed to “man the barricades” against this monster.
I was pleasantly surprised during the Seattle protests by the numbers of young people who showed up. I hope this undercuts the “apathetic youth” stereotype. However, what bothers me about activism is that much of it revolves around chanting pithy slogans and raising triumphant fists of refusal in the air.
Globalization is an incredibly complex phenomenon that deserves serious study, and not just by those who support or oppose it: no one’s life will remain untouched by it, so it behooves us all to learn about it. We need to penetrate the “globalization mystique” whereby globalization “occurs” at a remote, abstract level. I hope that our generation does not limit its purview to decrying the excesses of globalization, but can instead develops a more utopian strain of thinking. Movements seldom move without visionaries.