nettime's_indigestive_system on Thu, 31 Oct 2002 07:20:47 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> wellstone transformed digest [human being, wang] |
Re: <nettime> Wellstone transformed Dan Wang <[email protected]> human being <[email protected]> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 00:49:12 -0600 Subject: Re: <nettime> Wellstone transformed From: Dan Wang <[email protected]> Well, this much is true: Paul Wellstone didn't have the kind of protection that other big-time politicians have. If somebody wanted to sabotage a Democrat's campaign, his would be high on the list if only for reasons of immunity from political revenge. Paul didn't have the deeply entrenched powers on his side, nor was he owed much by any powerful interest. Also, to feed the foul-play theories further--sabotaging the campaign would probably require assassination because Paul was basically incorruptible on the personal level. He just didn't have it in him to be sleazy. Sabotage or not, he's gone. But the lessons remain, and those aren't being talked about, either. So here are a few thoughts. Something that the commentators and electoral analysts never quite understood about Paul Wellstone, and still don't: he was at heart an organizer. I was a student of his. For me and scores of his other former students, Paul was the living embodiment of the grassroots tradition. Combine that with the fact that he was an academic and what you get is a guy who made political organizing an object of study and experimentation. If you got power, then the experiment worked. If you didn't, then you tried something else. Contrary to how the mass media has portrayed him, Paul was anything but an idealistic lost liberal. Anything but na�ve. When talking politics (which is what he was almost always talking), he used the word 'power' *all* the time. He understood that politics is war by other means. He also knew there was an army just waiting to be assembled for his side. He became more circumspect with his terminology after he became a senator, but only because it was a cosmetic requirement of the job. His doctoral dissertation was, if I remember correctly, titled "The Black Radicals: What Do They Want?", and was based on a lot of research conducted in urban ghettos. His first book was titled "How the Rural Poor Got Power", and was similarly based on firsthand contact and exchange with farmers suffering foreclosure and the rural unemployed. Between the two works lay his greatest talent, and for us the most valuable lesson--the man knew how to talk and how to listen, how to build trust and friendship with people from any socioeconomic or cultural group, how to learn from others, how to give credit to others, how to see ordinary people as agents. People who, with the right tactics, can exercise political power. By the time he chaired Jesse Jackson's campaign in Minnesota in '88, Paul was already way beyond the Rainbow Coalition, in terms of actual experience working with a true cross section of the Left. There was something incredibly anachronistic about Paul--the scrappy neighborhood organizer who went national--but I would argue for revisiting the ideas and subjects he taught. The basics, in times of acute crisis (like right now), are still very relevant. What do we want? How do we get it? If we don't get it, then we try something else. He wasn't much for the mirror stage, the logocentrism of language, the spectacularized society. But he knew the history of American protest and organizing through and through, from the populist farmers to the suffragists to the labor movements to the civil rights marchers to the sds-ers to the grape boycotts to the anti-nuke groups to the sanctuary movement, and so on. Because he identified with the most marginalized people, he firmly believed that the consequences of political activism and organizing were almost guaranteed to be better than inaction, even when things developed in unforeseen ways. That's something to remember these days: enforced despair is to be rebelled against, and optional despair is afforded to the privileged. Organizing as experimentation. To conduct the successful experiment. Political science in the best sense of the term. The experiment Paul conducted using himself as the subject succeeded wildly. Even in death, the confirmation of success is there. Why else would more than 20,000 people attend a memorial service for a United States Senator, in an age when ordinary people are more than likely tempted to celebrate when a prominent politician goes down? Dan w. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 02:05:42 -0600 Subject: Re: <nettime> Wellstone transformed From: human being <[email protected]> to add some thoughts to those Dan shares... i am uncertain if the Wellstone memorial was shown on national U.S. television- but if it was not- find a videotape! get a tape and watch the 3+ hours of it, if you have the chance, as it was an historic moment in political opposition to reigning power politics, through what i can only relate to those earlier, smokey conventions in the 50s and 60s, in which a chaotic element still seemed to exist in the process (it was not as much a finite or closed process, made-for-TV). or, even to descriptions of earlier debates a hundred plus years ago, in which people would openly debate ideas with a roomful of persons, for hours on end. those versed in political history/science may have better examples or correct this notion if mistaken. the memorial was expected to be something somber as far as it might be expected, with three members of one of the most unique politician's lost, in addition to three staff. but that is not how it it went, from beginning to end. if words could try to span what the difference was, it was to begin with 'sounds of blackness' playing live music, while regular citizens and well-known politicians filed into the University stadium, with heartfelt and good humored and quite funny story telling and celebrations of memories, and people, by relatives, to an ideological u-turn from someone close to the Wellstone campaign who may still be fighting for the next week's election, as if he was fighting for his boss, wanting to win it and by whatever means possible which torqued the night's evenness into deeply distorted purposes for a memorial (calling on Republican Senators to vote for Wellstone, and basically, to stop the democratic process and give Wellstone (umm, now Mondale, but 'Vote for Paul') the election next tuesday. it was difficult to watch this and yet in hindsight, anyone close to the campaign, having lost their bosses, have to give a close personal speech about them, and then continue to press-on in a deeply embittered election fight- well, it is under- standable and was smoothed over by a hail-mary recovery. the reason this one Senator's memorial is worth writing about for a global audience is that this was the first formal coming together of forces deeply opposed to what is going on in the United States of America today, not in the short-term sense of quick-power, but in the sense of the purpose of political power, the reason. and it was this sense that goes far beyond rhetoric and soundbites, and was successfully transmitted by live television, as if it were a democratic process in itself. there was a great civility, a good temperament, and, it was political but almost entirely having nothing to do with parties or political affiliations, but about ideas, dreams, wishes, shared hopes, work to be done, relating, and organizing communities. with lessons of values, education, justice, and many other common sense goals and realties that tie diverse peoples together, family, city, country, world. there was a Kennedyesque coronation quality to the family that survives, two sons who shared with joy and freedom what has been gained, and created a sense of continuity, and identification. so too, political staffers, and other politicians in the state and federal branches present may also find a renewed sense of connection, as the peoples response to these events, and this night in particular, demonstrated what is missing in the current political system, and may be systemically missing, until changes can be made to transform power, to work for the people. to bring perspective, Iowa's Senator Harkin closed the night with a raucous speech, bringing the audience to its feet with hope and cheers and determination, to go beyond. to not only make it through, but make politics anew. this moment was one bridging the past (DFL-Liberal) with the Clinton-era, and Al Gore's political realities, which in hindsight may have less to do with Clinton being a menace than with Leiberman's sympathies with Republican agendas. there was something about a barn raising (not sure if this is the most accurate term) or a dusty meeting in an old meeting hall, to discuss politics for a people, that this night reminded me of, iconic because in my lifetime there has never been anything so 'real' in politics, as post-assassination politics, most everything has seemed much more scripted, made-for-TV, and reducing risks. about Wellstone's earlier work, i first encountered his work as a community organizer described in 'confrontation on the prairie' [1] in which there was a rural revolt over electrical rights-of-way for high-voltage pylons through farmland. protests, tractors pulling down power towers, national guard called out. Wellstone involved. this it seemed may be related to his earlier political career, maybe even 'power' itself, i don't know, but found out after his death that he co-authored a book entitled: "Powerline: The First Battle of America's Energy War." given the war, and energy-issues in particular, i always wondered why Wellstone was quite about the connections, but then again, being alone talking about such things may not be a good thing for long-term survival, as none in the Senate are vocally challenging the U.S. energy policy to date (dependency on oil, nuclear energy, as drafted prior to the War on Terror and 9/11, and un- changed even though these are the #1 and #2 national security threats, homeland included, that could be changed for the betterment of everyone, if political expediency were not foremost of political priorities). another aspect which was especially interesting (to me at least) is the aspect of community organizing, in that like the memorial, there was an inclusiveness to the event, everyone belonged, everyone was equal, and the politics were about people, not of parties or of some arcane issue so differentiated by strategists as to make philosophical paradoxes look like bad jokes, when trying to reverse engineer their soundbites back onto the common sense issues of social and economic justice, equality, freedom, pursuit of a common good. this same aspect, pre-political, is also described by Walter Gropius in a scope of total architecture, in which it education is central to building, and if one is to build a new architecture, it is suggested to begin with organizing communities. this always struck me as odd, until the internet aspect of portals made independent community work more of a possibility. and yet it directly relates to the realities of trying to work with diverse groups of individuals for common goals. and in a sense, it is political work, also. [2] if anything, the loss of Senator Wellstone, and the public reaction and action, both by citizens and by official representatives, does give a real sense of passion otherwise lacking, so much so that Harkin had his suitcoat off and was waving his arm in a rousing speech, bringing an audience to its feet, with a fire in the bellies and minds of those experiencing what was an unforgettable and most important evening, and new day, in U.S. American politics. and that is, there is a movement here, and it is only going to be growing. to spring.... references ----------------------------- [1] excerpt: ----- source * Days of Rage: Minnesota Farmers Fight First Battle of America's Energy War. General Assembly to Stop the Powerline. Manifesto commemorating the 1st Annual Powerline Protest Reunion & Celebration, August 16, 1981. 1k or 7k, 2091, .M6, C664 (17.8) Pamphlet found in the archives of the Minnesota Historical Library. ----- source: Trouble on the Land: Confrontation on the Prairie. Paul David Wellstone and Lamont Tarbox. December 1977. The Progressive. (17.9) pp.41-43, #227016. found in the archives of the Minnesota Historical Library. ----- First, the "energy wars" that erupted in the 1970s between Minnesota farming communities and both PUBLIC cooperative and PRIVATE ELECTRICAL utilities sparked a nationwide debate on ELECTRICAL POWER. For example, in Lowry, Minnesota, a community group named "General Assembly to Stop the Powerline" organized to stop a POWERLINE right-of-way crossing through their rural farmland. A "total tactic" was used: demonstrations were staged, protest letters were written to STATE representatives, but the POWER plans still moved ahead; foundations and building materials were destroyed, and tractors pulled down dozens of TRANSMISSION TOWERs as they were erected; finally the State police was called in, people were arrested, and the POWERPLANTs and POWERLINEs were finally constructed and made operational. From their 1981 manifesto, the community states its experience: "We survive. We were not stopped when we were repeatedly and shamefully betrayed by the politicians... We continue to endure the injuries inflicted by a parade of incompetent bureaucrats acting in collusion with the utilities. We were not defeated when callous judges kept deciding that the time and money of the power companies were more important than truth, and even more important than the law. The combined brute force of the FBI, the BCA, the State and local police and private armies hired by the utilities has not been strong enough to destroy us. And we have survived the lies, the threats and intimidations and deceits, and the arrogant destruction brought upon us by the power companies themselves. The line went into commercial operation two years ago, and we are still survivors! That has never happened before... "We shall continue to survive as an organized opposition to this powerline until those responsible for this powerline learn to behave with a healthy respect for our values, and until the proper authorities have taken appropriate action to rectify this untenable situation in which we find ourselves entrapped ." (17.8) This event was repeated all over communities in the rest of the United States of AMERICA. And another battle of POWER between utilities and Minnesota farmers eventually made its impact in national politics when a political science professor at Carleton College, now Senator Paul Wellstone, wrote an article about this "Confrontation on the Prairie" detailing farmers' fears of a POWERLINE right-of-way: "[Farmers] fear the massive electrical current will cause significant chemical reactions in the air around the line, creating dangerously high concentrations of ozone. They also have other worries: Large pieces of equipment, buildings, and fences may have to be grounded to prevent a build-up of static electricity and to keep current from jumping from the line to the ground. Advanced irrigation systems may be rendered useless, and aeriel spraying may have to be curtailed. The towers may enhance the risk of serious accidents whenever heavy machinery is used. The line may create a noticeable noise that bothers livestock, and decrease the value of the farmlands. And the farmers are deeply disturbed about the way the utilities have tried to steam-roller permission to construct the line from local and state officials." (17.9) Through the organization and protest by communities of farmers and citizens, in the name of their 'sacred trust with the land', several POWERLINEs were not built, but many more POWERLINEs and POWERPLANTs to fuel THE GRID were eventually built as planned, regardless of local input. http://www.electronetwork.org/works/ae/overview/a_and_e/issues/ltop.htm --------------------------------------------------------- [2] excerpt from a thesis which samples gropius' ideas and recontextualizes them, as follows... We propose that achieving the general knowledge and holistic "composite mind" Gropius envisions will result from rationally understanding ELECTRICITY, the ELECTRICAL WORLD, EPOCH, and INFRASTRUCTURE in relation to ARCHITECTURE. (107) Ultimately this leads to Gropius' belief in democratic, ground-up planning of communities and ARCHITECTURAL knowledge. In these newly developing core "community centers" our ARCHITECTURAL planning begins: "[P]articipation is the key word in planning. Participation sharpens individual responsibility, the prime factor in making a community coherent, in developing group vision and pride in the self-created environment. Such educational conception would put book knowledge in its right place, as an auxillary only to experience in action, which alone can lead to constructive attitudes and habits of thought." (109) Similarly, ARCHITECTs need to design "community centers" within CYBERSPACE, such as Internet COMPUTER NETWORK websites, to facilitate the creation of a democratic community from the ground up. In closing Gropius concludes that "an architect or planner worth the name must have a very broad and comprehensive vision to achieve a true synthesis of a future community. This we might call "total architecture." " (110) http://www.electronetwork.org/works/ae/overview/towards/frag/grop/ ltop.htm --------------------- the public energy network democratic energy policy by and for humans worldwide http://www.electronetwork.org/works/pen/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]