Re: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark Shadow That Plutocracy Casts on American Society

You're not alone, Miriam. History is always written by folks who are,
"floating around in a universe of relativism".
How else can it be? None of us today, no matter how scholarly we may
believe ourselves to be, can really know what living in 1615 was like.
Historians today reflect not only what they have researched, but how
they see reality. And that is based upon how they were raised, and
how their family's history shaped their thinking. We seem to think
that because we've amassed huge piles of "information", that it allows
us to peel away all the layers of ourselves, and accurately recount
events of hundreds and thousands of years ago.
History, as my dad was so fond of saying, is written by the victors.
If true, we already are at a disadvantage in our attempts to remain
unbiased.
History is simply our best guess. This is not to say that we should
have less respect for the honest efforts of our historians. I just
wish that some of them were not so full of themselves.
My Holy History Book is, A People's History of the United States, by
Howard Zinn. Stand it alongside the history books I studied at the
University of Washington, back in the mid 1950's. Zinn's history much
more represents what was going on across this nation as it expanded
from sea to shining sea...and beyond. But I most certainly would
never say that Zinn was unbiased.
Our history can point us toward a brighter future, or destroy us. It
is all in the way we use it, twist it to prove our biases. We need to
teach our children to carefully examine that which is presented to
them as "Facts". Accepting that which others tell us is "Truth" will
be our downfall. All written information has come originally from the
biased minds of Human Beings. Sorry, I do not intend to offend those
who believe that some written works are Divinely Inspired. Those
should be the first writings we carefully probe.
So again, all in all, history is simply our best guess at events of the past.

Carl Jarvis


On 12/7/14, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Actually, I never heard Roger downplay the historical facts that you
> mention. He has , however, explained them in terms of Marxist theory. I was
> just about to write that history taught in a country's schools is
> nationalistic propaganda while history written by professional historians
> is
> more objective. But I was stopped cold by remembering that there are
> different historical movements in Israel and these are schools of thought
> within Israeli professional historians. There was a mythological national
> hystory accepted until the nineties. And then their was a new historical
> movement which re-evaluated and corrected the history of Israel. Ilan Pappe
> is one of the people who came out of that movement. But then, at the end of
> the nineties, a group of those historians reverted back to their ultra
> nationalistic views. They took the history that they had written during the
> nineties and revised it to justify the actions of Israeli leaders which had
> come under criticism because of the material they wrote in the nineties. So
> I guess that leaves me floating around in a universe of relativism.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Democracy [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On
> Behalf Of ted chittenden
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 11:50 AM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: RE: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark Shadow That Plutocracy Casts on
> American Society
>
> Miriam:
> Alice is correct! If you are viewing history through a philosophical lens,
> no matter what that lens may be, then you will shortchange those historical
> events that disagree with your theory and highlight those that do agree
> with
> your theory. In Roger's case, he may, because he is a Marxist, choose to
> ignore or downplay events such as Stalin's purges in the Soviet Union or
> Fidel Castro's imprisonments of those who speak out against him in Cuba. On
> the other hand, many U.S. history books, both past and present, downplay or
> ignore how Caucasians treated native Americans, blacks, and other
> immigrants, because these treatments don't fit in with the philosophy of
> American exceptionalism.
> --
> Ted Chittenden
>
> Every story has at least two sides if not more.
> ---- Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> Alice,
>
> I think there's a difference. People may choose certain facts and ignore
> others. When they do that, they're distorting history in order to
> influence
> the public's perceptions. Roger is talking about consciously choosing a
> philosophical framework through which to analyze historical facts. His
> contention is that the only philosophical framework which will lead to
> change is Marxist theory. His belief is that if one doesn't adhere to
> Marxist theory, one can't innitiate useful change.
>
> Miriam
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Blind-Democracy [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On
> Behalf Of Alice Dampman Humel
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 5:20 AM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark Shadow That Plutocracy Casts on
> American Society
>
>
> Isn't that what we accuse the right-wingers of doing? They choose the
> version of history that serves their causes and their ideology the best.
> They ignore any facts or versions that contradict their ideology or impede
> their causes.
>
> On Dec 6, 2014, at 8:22 PM, Roger Loran Bailey <Rogerbailey81@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> There may be many ways to look at history and economics, but
> depending on what you want to do with your knowledge of history and
> economics you have to pick the one that helps your cause the best.
> On 12/6/2014 4:35 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>
>
> Perhaps another way of putting it is that Marxism is a
> framework for
> conceptualizing history and economics. But if someone
> insists that it is the
> one and only way to look at history and economics, than that
> individual is
> being dogmatic.
>
> Miriam
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Blind-Democracy
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On
> Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2014 3:26 PM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark Shadow That
> Plutocracy Casts on
> American Society
>
>
> If you know the first thing about Marxism you know that it
> is not dogmatic.
> If you are one of those people who think Barack Obama is a
> socialist then
> you might think it is dogmatic, but then you wouldn't know
> the first thing
> about it, would you?
>
> On 12/6/2014 9:36 AM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
>
>
> Marxism is not a dogmatism?
>
> That's one man's opinion, shared, admittedly, among many,
> but also
> disputed by many. On Dec 4, 2014, at 11:35 PM, Roger Loran
> Bailey
> <Rogerbailey81@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> I am not going to go back to find my message either, but I
> may have said something like that. If I used those exact
> words I think I can
> explain what I meant. You said something that was very
> liberal sounding. I
> know you do that a lot. I see that as a detrimental ideology
> and I point out
> why it is liberal sounding and what is wrong with that. By
> then, of course,
> I have launched on a criticism of liberalism and I am not
> accusing any one
> person of anything. My position is that liberalism, or more
> precisely,
> bourgeois liberalism, is a bourgeois ideology and it
> represents the
> interests of the bourgeoisie. I do count myself as a Marxist
> and so I
> promote points of view that are in the interests of the
> working class.
> Marxism, however, is not a dogmatism. One of its basic
> premises is that
> scientific investigation is the only way to determine the
> nature of reality.
> That requires the sloughing off of old ideas when
> discoveries about reality
> show that the old ideas have been wrong. It is religious
> faith that insists
> that the old ideas are the only correct ideas no matter how
> profoundly they
> have been proven wrong. Marxism does not, though, view the
> world from a
> simple empirical stance that simply describes the world and
> leaves it at
> that. It does have a perspective of striving for human
> liberation. That
> means that other ideologies, no matter how well they may
> simply describe the
> world around us, are there to be defeated if they are
> detrimental to human
> liberation.
> On 12/4/2014 10:59 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>
>
> I think, but I'm not going to go back to find the
> email, that you very
> specifically said something to the effect of, "now
> you're sounding like a
> Liberal and liberals andprogressives act as if they
> are different from
> working people and preach to them". So, I certainly
> think that was a sort
> of caution to me on your part. And as I've said, I
> think that these labels
> are detrimental. I was talking about how you make
> assumptions about people
> who define themselves as "liberal" or "progressive"
> and I think that the
> assumptions are unfair. I think that you are saying
> that there is one
> correct way to think about these issues that we
> discuss and that correct way
> is the marxist way. And if I don't consider myself a
> Marxist and if I don't
> use Marxist class definitions, than I'm a Liberal or
> a Progressive and it's
> wrong to be a Liberal or a Progressive because all
> Liberals and Progressives
> feel superior to working people and don't see
> themselves as having the ssame
> needs and interests and are feeling and acting
> superior. That's what I
> understand you to be saying in what you write. To
> me, this is like the Born
> Again Christian gtelling you that you are damned and
> will go to hell because
> you're not a believer. It's not literally the ssame
> thing. I'm using the
> Evangelical Christian's attitudes toward non
> Christians as an analogy. There
> are a lot of differences of opinion among all of us
> on this list. From what
> I've read, there are a lot of different marxist
> groups that disagree with
> each other about the interpretation of marxist
> theory as well. Carl talks a
> lot about how people need to learn how to live
> peacefully with each other in
> the world. We need to learn how to argue and
> discuss, but continue to
> respect each other's differences on this list.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Democracy
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org] On
> Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 10:11 PM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark Shadow That
> Plutocracy Casts on
> American Society
>
> Again, I was not talking about you or any other
> individual. I was talking
> about groups. When I talk about classes I am talking
> about classes, not the
> individuals in a class. When I talk about
> ideologies, whether it is
> liberalism, fascism, Christianity or any other
> ideology, I am talking about
> an ideology. What you might want to do is to engage
> in some introspection
> and ask yourself why it is that when I say something
> about liberals you
> automatically jump to the conclusion that I am
> talking about you personally.
> On 12/4/2014 5:57 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>
>
> OK. I'm trying to say that whatever name I
> use to define where I am on
> the social scale, is snot relevant to how I
> feel about what is
> happening to the majority of people in this
> country economically. I
> don't care how you label them, working class
> or whatever, nor is it
> accurate to state that if I call myself
> "liberal" or "progressive",
> I'm seeing myself as separate and superior
> from other people. That's
> your perception of people who use that term,
> and it may be accurate
> for some people. But it's a stereotype and
> it's unfair to make
> generalizations about the attitudes of a
> whole class of people whom
> you don't know. It is certainly inaccurate
> for you to say that if I
> call myself a Progressive, I feel superior
> to, and separate from
> working people and that I feel that I can
> preach to them. Our
> politicians are giving the same importance
> to labels as you and Carl
> are except that you call everyone working
> class and they call everyone
> middle class. My point is, the labels don't
> matter. What matters is
> how I think and feel, and what I do. I
> mentioned those things about my
> parents' work and the work that I did to
> illustrate my point that
> these labels, which seem to have so much
> importance to you, are just
> ways of categorizing work and education and
> income level. I know people
>
>
> who have worked very hard all of their lives and
> whose incomes are limited,
> and whose politics are way to the right of mine.
>
>
> These people do not identify with working
> people nor would they join a
> struggle for workers' rights. If you knocked
> on their doors and said
> you were from the Socialist Workers' Party,
> they'd probably call the
> cops or the FBI!
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Democracy
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org]
> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 3:02 PM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Bill Moyer: The Long, Dark
> Shadow That Plutocracy Casts
> on American Society
>
> You are replying to a message that I sent,
> but somehow your reply does
> not seem relevant to the message. I really
> do not see what semantics
> has to do with the fact that a class that is
> oppressed has to throw
> off that oppression itself. It remains that
> liberals who will not dare
> want anyone to think that they are a part of
> the working class will
> not bring about the liberation of the
> working class by standing on the
>
>
> outside and preaching.
>
>
> The agitation has to be done by workers
> alongside their fellow workers.
> Whatever relevance your parents and their
> jobs has to this I don't
> understand.
> On 12/3/2014 11:23 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>
>
> To me, this is all symantics and it
> sounds very much like religious
> preaching. You are criticizing what
> I said because I'm not following
> the Marxist line. Actually, it
> sounds like what I've read about the
> struggle sessions held in
> communities in China. I'm an old retired
> social worker who had a private
> practise in international adoptions.
> My father was a factory worker. My
> mother worked as a saleswoman in a
> department store. If you want me to
> say I'm working class, fine. My
> point is that your labels don't
> matter. I know who I am and I'm not
> changing my personal identity which
> includes my values and
> preferences, my formal education,
> and my self education to fit into
>
>
> someone's socio-political concepts.
>
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Democracy
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org]
> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014
> 8:57 PM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Bill Moyer: The Long,
> Dark Shadow That Plutocracy Casts
> on American Society
>
> If by progressive you mean liberal
> you can forget about it. Liberals
> give a lot of lip service to the
> struggles of the working class, but
> they do not want the working class
> to wake up. To effect in the
> consciousness of the working class
> there have to be some successful
> struggles. You are not going to
> change minds just by preaching from
> the outside while disdaining to be
> thought of as working class
> yourself. To participate in the
> changing of the consciousness of the
> working class you have to be among
> and a part of the working class
> and to
>
>
> agitate in that milieu.
>
>
> On 12/3/2014 5:55 PM, Miriam Vieni
> wrote:
>
>
> The white folks who are truly blue
> collar and working class people,
> at least the ones with whom I have
> contact, do feel angry. They do
> feel
>
>
> cheated.
>
>
> However, they tend to believe the
> explanations provided to them by
> conservative media figures. The very
> kind lady who cleans my
> apartment is originally from
> Croatia, from a peasant background. She
> reads books by Bill O'Reilly and she
> quotes him. "The trouble with
> this country is it's too liberal.
> Obamacare is too Communist. It's
> the reason that they're cutting
> medicare to the bone". When I try to
> explain where Obamacare came from
> and that it has nothing to do with
> medicare, her response is, "Well,
> that's my opinion". So then do I
> get into a discussion with her about
> how her opinion is based on
> misinformation, not facts? I tried a
> little, but there's no point.
> But the right wing propaganda is
> incredibly strong and it permeates
> our
>
>
> whole society.
>
>
> The Left is correct that people are
> angry and that they're angry
> because they know they're being
> short changed. However, who is going
> to be capable of changing their
> consciousness? I think that if the
> Progressive Movements wants to be
> successful, its members need to
> stop living in a dream world where
> they talk to each other about how
> the public really shares their
> goals. I think that they need to
> augment the efforts already being
> made with fast food and big box
> store workers, and find ways of
> reaching all these conservative blue
> collar
>
>
> people like the majority of the
> population that lives on Long Island.
>
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Blind-Democracy
> [mailto:blind-democracy-bounces@octothorp.org]
> On Behalf Of ted chittenden
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014
> 3:13 PM
> To: Blind Democracy Discussion List
> Subject: RE: Bill Moyer: The Long,
> Dark Shadow That Plutocracy Casts
> on American Society
>
> To add to Miriam's point: many
> people in the upper middle class view
> themselves as either having made it
> or working their way towards
> earning more wealth for themselves
> and their families. They (mostly)
> view the so-called 1% as being where
> they themselves would like to be.
> These people, by and large, do not
> empathize with the working and
> non-working poor--they are too
> immersed in their own lives to notice
> them
>
>
> much.
>
>
> And they support the current system.
> As my mom's youngest surviving
> brother told one of the other family
> members within my hearing last
> Thanksgiving, "It's not having all
> the stuff at the beginning that's
> good. It's working to get what you
> got now that makes what you got
> now worth it." And that's really how
> these people believe. And it
> really doesn't matter if these
> people have been fed a lie by the
> upper classes--they continue to
> believe that lie themselves and
> continue to feed
>
>
> it down to the classes below them.
>
>
> And those who point out the lie are
> shunned and ridiculed for doing
> just that--most members of the upper
> middle class just don't believe
> what the naysayers say to be true!
> --
> Ted Chittenden
>
> Every
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
>
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blind-Democracy mailing list
> Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
> https://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
>