Back in the warm days of July, it is reported Michele Bachmann termed us "a nation of slaves," or said that "Obama is making us a nation of slaves," and the frenzied zealots doubtlessly cheered.
Watch it on YouTube. See if they cheered.
It got very wide coverage, e.g., here, here, in Stillwater where the Bachmann McMansion homestead is sited (see, e.g., here and here) and even the Brits picked it up for headlining purposes. My favorite online publishing on that sloganeering demagoguery, because of the site's title and its value added imagery, is here, (source of this trenchant screenshot).
As news it's old - months old in today's times is old news - but the phrase has stuck with me. It has reverberated about my mind as if I had heard it - or something similar - before. The blog troll made the pieces come together. This is the historic instance of sloganeering demagoguery to which the Bachmann viewpoint seems inextricably tied - slaves, chains, all that troubling but suggestive imagery used to incite mob reaction:
Yes it is inflamatory, yes it is working a troubled and questioning proletariat mob into frenzy mode, but what else is the Tea Party movement after all? It only differs from Marxist mob incitement by being aimed at co-opting angry prols into voting against their interests and voting GOP in a current election, and not for an all time change in how the world works. Marx and Engles appear under the lens of history to have had different motives for their mob incitement, we were not there and can only read the learned books, but the identical motivation of inflaming mass passion to challenge governmen - indeed to ostensibly challenge world order, that is plain and simple in Tea Party things - as plain and simple as is Glen Beck.
So, nation of slaves - contemplating casting off your chains, etc.; ask first, how, really, are slavemasters treating slaves? Put another way ---
DO THE WORKERS AT BACHMANN -&- ASSOCIATES NOW HAVE HEALTHCARE COVERAGE OR ARE THEY STILL BEING EXPLOITED BEYOND SUCH A DECENCY?
_______________
Had the blog troll not insistently kept calling me a marxist, (without knowing what one is, I admit I too have not read Marx), I expect my mind would never have been jogged to make the connection among mob-inciting demagoguing misuse of rhetoric and of a rhetorical opportunity. Thanks, troll. Once you see it, you wonder why you missed it previously. The Tea Party incitement truly is nothing but the organized sowing of rhetorical discord among distressed and exploited prols. What does that make Michele and Sarah? Especially so for Bachmann, if the private sector reality is seeing workers in the healthcare community still being left without private sector employer provided healthcare benefits by the Bachmanns, intent on maximizing profit? Clinic workers back in 2004 had no coverage. That fact was reported. Is it still so?
10 comments:
Damn! you are one goofy bastard! ..Did you hear? King Obama declared McDonald's except from Obomacare along with the UAW. Open your FU#$%*^ eyes and see why the tea party is so popular. The people have Fu%$&#@ had it!
See what I mean about appeal to disgruntled prols.
Anon - You are saying reelecting Michele Bachmann will cure your ills?
She's been in Congress since 2004. What change has she made? What cause is there to expect anything but more of the same from her?
She is doing exactly what I want my Representative to do. Fight you progressive Assholes tooth and nail! I had to live through Carter now I have to live through this shit? 1 out of every 5 people are on food stamps! You socialist bastards get the Fu%# out of this country!
Anon - You'd pull the foodstamps, but we are not all like that.
Also if I were you I'd have a bit mor sympathy on the food stamps. Think it over, IT IS the Bush depression they're living with.
You jerks have controlled congress since 2006! Wake the fu#@ up!
Anon - I am not responsible for the GOP-lite Blue Dogs, and how they and people like Baucus ruined a chance at real healthcare reform. If only some of the Republicans had courage to break ranks and be reasonable, as the six on the Pawlenty veto, and if only Obama had not taken so much off the table at the start, things could have been real. I agree the bill passed is bad. Minnesota, at least, has a strong public spirited voice for the Minnesota Health Plan. May it become law, making our state the most compassionate and sensible in the Union.
And if the GOP had not been a lockstep Party of No, reforms could have lessened the hardship that the GOP seems to enjoy seeing inflicted by the tight credit now at play, in affecting citizen well-being.
But Anon. you are correct. Reid and Pelosi did not have enough vision and they had Blue Dogs and other foot-draggers, Liebermans we can call them, to appease. And the solidarity of the GOP in opposition to doing helpful things, for crass political reasons as are being now played out - is unconscionable.
And were in the constution does it say helth care is a right? i suppose you want me to pay for your Vigra too!You progressives socialist assholes suck!
Anon - "Where" and not "were."
Where in the Constitution does it say there will be a federal reserve, automobile safety regulations, airports, concrete federal interstate highways, or public bridges?
Duh!
Anon - Where (not were) in the Constitution does it say, FBI, CIA, DIA, NSA, NRC, HSA, standing armies (vs. a self armed militia per the second amendment), domestic spying, or torture (cruel and unfortunately under Bush-Cheney, probably Obama too, NOT unusual)? Where in the Constitution does it say "war on terror" and massive police presence in city streets as during the RNC? Where in the Constitution does it say the Supreme Court can void election laws saying corporations cannot exert undue biasing influence in elections, and with redistricting coming up, (read Baker v. Carr for an answer), where does the Constitution say one adult person, one vote? Anon, you feel you deserve more than one vote? You'd want a poll tax or literacy test? What provision of the Constitution gives governmental power for a "war on drugs," indeed, what Constitutional provision gives the federal government power to control substances (criminalizing some natural products and keeping some medicines off an open market and in hands of a distributional monopoly set-up)? Grow up. Fight what's wrong, not what should be, to be right.
Post a Comment