I think the better ones I have listened to are American Prestige, Know Your Enemy, and This is Revolution. Pascal Robert would be a great collaborator for you.
I would say podcast is the next step. I think there is probably a network of left commentators you could enlist. Your reputation precedes you. You have a great combination of intellect and rhetorical bomb throwing . This alone qualifies you. Good luck and thank you for your leadership
Without having to go into a lengthy dissertation, a podcast can be listened to while driving or doing chores around the house, and maybe throw in some of your speeches from the different rallies you might speak at. With videos, you actually have to stop what you're doing and watch the interview.
I have been reading your columns for many years at Counterpoint. I find them to be very well written, exciting, informative and they help me to understand what is happening currently in our country. I look forward to continuing to read your columns and participate in other activities at your Substack. You and Chris Hedges are my favorite columnists.
You should check out Chris Hedges Substack, where he does a variety of things, weekly columns, weekly podcasts and he has a spoken version of his weekly column.
Regarding the new formats that you are considering adding (discussions, audio, etc.) -- Try it for free first before committing yourself to it. Perhaps this is obvious. It's not just a question of what seems effective, but also what you're comfortable with. You'll only keep doing it if you're comfortable with it.
And not regarding the new formats, but regarding your description of your politics: There may be some "cowardice" in the left, as you say, but I don't believe that's our major problem. I think the problem is more that we are disorganized, discouraged, and (by organs of the establishment) misled. I don't know what to do about that, but calling us cowards is actually counter-productive. We need to believe in ourselves, in each other, and in the potential of human nature. We socialists need solidarity, and it's based on a belief in how we =can= behave toward each other, a belief about human nature. (I can say more about that if you're interested.) We need a spreading of awareness; your writing can help with that of course. But my main point is, it's not cowardice.
Well, I think "us" is too broad. Bear in mind I said "what passes for a 'left' in the US" and not the actual radical left, which is too small but exists. And to be honest, in the professional and academic liberal class, I have actually had numerous conversations in which there's zero hiding of it. Literally, I've heard "I think you are right but I can't get away with saying or writing that." Said quite sheepishly. Maybe "cowardice" is the wrong word. Some would call it smarts. Like I said, there's a real price to be paid. Buck the power relations and you pay. Hedges can't work at the Times anymore. I can tell stories about academia that would chill the spine.
If journalism is the first wave (is that the word?) of historical writing, journalists are on the front lines of of historic class struggle, in the verbal (often the physical) heat of battle; objectively, if not subjectively, on one side or the other.
Afaics, many journalists aren't brave enough for the mission, thus, they either choose to make a career 'pulling their rhetorical punches' and/or intentionally refusing to hit the real 'nail' on its actual 'head'.
This is all over the Times and Wapo...I am constantly struck by the downplaying, normalization, and cowardice ...the servile willingness to play by the rules of "manufacturing consent."
Well, I don't know what word to replace "cowardice" with -- I think I'd need a sentence or two. Let's take the example of Hedges no longer being employed by the Times. He put a big truth out there, and lost the opportunity to tell lots and lots of smaller truths to a bigger audience. Was his choice a net gain or a net loss for the cause, the movement, the world? I don't know. Each of us must make that judgment for himself. And some of us had children before we realized we'd be going off to a war of words, and we feel an obligation to protect and support those children to at least some minimal degree; that's another factor in the judgment call.
I've been an activist of one sort or another for 16 years. I've never yet been arrested. I don't think that's cowardice. I haven't yet been in a situation where I felt that the movement would have a net gain from my getting arrested. Perhaps I just haven't been imaginative enough yet. Not all of us are gifted with imagination.
In my experience, getting arrested is commonly a decision. I've been in numeros meetings where it is decided who is willing and situated to be arrested and who isn't. No shame for those who can't. Real costs: Jessica Reznicek (sp) is doing 8 years in federal lock up for a little bit of monkey-wrenching of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Iowa. There's zero mysterious about what it takes to get arrested. Like when I was down in DC before, during, and after the Dobbs decision some people locked themselves to the Supreme Court gates with the explicit purpose of getting arrested. They had a great civil liberies lawyer and plea bargained out. The feds didn't want those trials, trust me. It's a bold and purposeful move often enough. On Hedges and the Times, you can't be serious: he was told by the national paper of record to stop being an open opponent of the insane mass murderous criminal imperialist US invasion of Iraq! You honestly think there's any moral case at all to be made for him to obey those inststructions so as to stay employed at the imperialist NYT? Really? And then write about current events under those rules?! Good grief, Eric. But back to getting arrested....really a diversion. I'm not talking about getting arrested. I'm talking mainly about getting hired/fired, keeping employment, getting promoted/demoted, getting grants, getting marginalized, and so on. Yes, people sometimes have to put things on the line and sometimes they can't afford to. I would say that we need some doctors now to take some risks around abortion in prohibition states...defy the insane Christian fascist war on abortion rights. Just one or two to step up. I will contribute to the legal defense fund of any doctor with the courage to buck this horrific war on women and girls. It could be quite galavanizing and strategic. It carries risk: a young doctor with kids and loans haging over her head would not be the best candidate.
Paul, I still think that compromisers may be useful to the cause, and my examples may surprise you.
Let me start with Robert Reich. Yes, the author of "Saving Capitalism" and numerous other apologies for capitalism. Now, we can make guesses about his motivations. Perhaps he really does believe the things he says, or perhaps he is secretly thinking "ha, ha, I'll fool them all." Who knows. I happen to believe he's sincere, but that hardly matters. The point is this: A lot of his writing, perhaps most of it, consists of pointing out various ways that certain present-day capitalists are corrupt. Of course, Reich thinks (or says) that the problem is in a few bad apples, where you and I know that the problem is in capitalism itself. But what is the effect on people who are complete beginners, people who have never before thought at all about political economy? If they are to go through an awakening process, I think for most of them it will be in stages, not all in one blinding flash. They will first become aware of "a few bad apples," and then later start to see the broader pattern and the mechanisms built into the system itself. Reich serves as a way station, an intermediate viewpoint. And by defending capitalism, he stays in the good graces of the establishment, and maintains easy communications between himself and that audience of beginners.
I would give a similar evaluation to Bernie Sanders, whose viewpoint is similar to Reich's. But Bernie went higher in the ranks of power -- something he could not have done if he had been a real socialist. For a while some of us believed Bernie had a real shot at becoming president. That's not as good as a real socialist becoming president. But I figured it was a start, a compromise between what I really want and what may be achievable in the near future. So I worked for the Bernie campaign despite being quite a bit to the left of him. (It was like "Clean for Gene," or are you too young for that reference?) Bernie got a lot of national attention. Bernie woke up a lot of beginners. I think some, perhaps many of those beginners have now gone beyond Bernie's intermediate viewpoint, but it was Bernie who got them to start thinking.
Really, most activists in the left are (in my opinion) only partially awakened. They have seen the light on some issues but are still fooled by the Matrix on other issues. We have to work with them, because that's all we've got. The climate activists and the defenders of Julian Assange are not being cowardly in their failing to mention how capitalism is a related issue -- either they don't see how it's related, or they don't want to lose their audience, which certainly doesn't see how it's related. I think Bob Avakian might be right about everything (I haven't studied enough of his stuff to be sure), but the word "communism" is too difficult a sell in the USA right now. A better word for nearly the same message is "Resource Based Economy," but that movement is a bit vague and doesn't have a charismatic leader. Peter Joseph is working on a new movie, and I have great hopes for it, but we'll see. I've lost track of where I'm going with this, so I'll stop here.
The Paul Street Germinal
I think the better ones I have listened to are American Prestige, Know Your Enemy, and This is Revolution. Pascal Robert would be a great collaborator for you.
I would say podcast is the next step. I think there is probably a network of left commentators you could enlist. Your reputation precedes you. You have a great combination of intellect and rhetorical bomb throwing . This alone qualifies you. Good luck and thank you for your leadership
Without having to go into a lengthy dissertation, a podcast can be listened to while driving or doing chores around the house, and maybe throw in some of your speeches from the different rallies you might speak at. With videos, you actually have to stop what you're doing and watch the interview.
I have been reading your columns for many years at Counterpoint. I find them to be very well written, exciting, informative and they help me to understand what is happening currently in our country. I look forward to continuing to read your columns and participate in other activities at your Substack. You and Chris Hedges are my favorite columnists.
You should check out Chris Hedges Substack, where he does a variety of things, weekly columns, weekly podcasts and he has a spoken version of his weekly column.
I’m thinking about it. I will contact you when I have a reasonable but exciting idea.
so what's wrong with Canadian Bacon?
haha. I love Mike's docs. I think epic fail is the consensus on his foray into fiction. I think he would agree!
Regarding the new formats that you are considering adding (discussions, audio, etc.) -- Try it for free first before committing yourself to it. Perhaps this is obvious. It's not just a question of what seems effective, but also what you're comfortable with. You'll only keep doing it if you're comfortable with it.
And not regarding the new formats, but regarding your description of your politics: There may be some "cowardice" in the left, as you say, but I don't believe that's our major problem. I think the problem is more that we are disorganized, discouraged, and (by organs of the establishment) misled. I don't know what to do about that, but calling us cowards is actually counter-productive. We need to believe in ourselves, in each other, and in the potential of human nature. We socialists need solidarity, and it's based on a belief in how we =can= behave toward each other, a belief about human nature. (I can say more about that if you're interested.) We need a spreading of awareness; your writing can help with that of course. But my main point is, it's not cowardice.
Well, I think "us" is too broad. Bear in mind I said "what passes for a 'left' in the US" and not the actual radical left, which is too small but exists. And to be honest, in the professional and academic liberal class, I have actually had numerous conversations in which there's zero hiding of it. Literally, I've heard "I think you are right but I can't get away with saying or writing that." Said quite sheepishly. Maybe "cowardice" is the wrong word. Some would call it smarts. Like I said, there's a real price to be paid. Buck the power relations and you pay. Hedges can't work at the Times anymore. I can tell stories about academia that would chill the spine.
I agree, Paul.
Journalistic cowardice is a major 'thing'.
If journalism is the first wave (is that the word?) of historical writing, journalists are on the front lines of of historic class struggle, in the verbal (often the physical) heat of battle; objectively, if not subjectively, on one side or the other.
Afaics, many journalists aren't brave enough for the mission, thus, they either choose to make a career 'pulling their rhetorical punches' and/or intentionally refusing to hit the real 'nail' on its actual 'head'.
It pays more.
This is all over the Times and Wapo...I am constantly struck by the downplaying, normalization, and cowardice ...the servile willingness to play by the rules of "manufacturing consent."
Well, I don't know what word to replace "cowardice" with -- I think I'd need a sentence or two. Let's take the example of Hedges no longer being employed by the Times. He put a big truth out there, and lost the opportunity to tell lots and lots of smaller truths to a bigger audience. Was his choice a net gain or a net loss for the cause, the movement, the world? I don't know. Each of us must make that judgment for himself. And some of us had children before we realized we'd be going off to a war of words, and we feel an obligation to protect and support those children to at least some minimal degree; that's another factor in the judgment call.
I've been an activist of one sort or another for 16 years. I've never yet been arrested. I don't think that's cowardice. I haven't yet been in a situation where I felt that the movement would have a net gain from my getting arrested. Perhaps I just haven't been imaginative enough yet. Not all of us are gifted with imagination.
In my experience, getting arrested is commonly a decision. I've been in numeros meetings where it is decided who is willing and situated to be arrested and who isn't. No shame for those who can't. Real costs: Jessica Reznicek (sp) is doing 8 years in federal lock up for a little bit of monkey-wrenching of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Iowa. There's zero mysterious about what it takes to get arrested. Like when I was down in DC before, during, and after the Dobbs decision some people locked themselves to the Supreme Court gates with the explicit purpose of getting arrested. They had a great civil liberies lawyer and plea bargained out. The feds didn't want those trials, trust me. It's a bold and purposeful move often enough. On Hedges and the Times, you can't be serious: he was told by the national paper of record to stop being an open opponent of the insane mass murderous criminal imperialist US invasion of Iraq! You honestly think there's any moral case at all to be made for him to obey those inststructions so as to stay employed at the imperialist NYT? Really? And then write about current events under those rules?! Good grief, Eric. But back to getting arrested....really a diversion. I'm not talking about getting arrested. I'm talking mainly about getting hired/fired, keeping employment, getting promoted/demoted, getting grants, getting marginalized, and so on. Yes, people sometimes have to put things on the line and sometimes they can't afford to. I would say that we need some doctors now to take some risks around abortion in prohibition states...defy the insane Christian fascist war on abortion rights. Just one or two to step up. I will contribute to the legal defense fund of any doctor with the courage to buck this horrific war on women and girls. It could be quite galavanizing and strategic. It carries risk: a young doctor with kids and loans haging over her head would not be the best candidate.
Paul, I still think that compromisers may be useful to the cause, and my examples may surprise you.
Let me start with Robert Reich. Yes, the author of "Saving Capitalism" and numerous other apologies for capitalism. Now, we can make guesses about his motivations. Perhaps he really does believe the things he says, or perhaps he is secretly thinking "ha, ha, I'll fool them all." Who knows. I happen to believe he's sincere, but that hardly matters. The point is this: A lot of his writing, perhaps most of it, consists of pointing out various ways that certain present-day capitalists are corrupt. Of course, Reich thinks (or says) that the problem is in a few bad apples, where you and I know that the problem is in capitalism itself. But what is the effect on people who are complete beginners, people who have never before thought at all about political economy? If they are to go through an awakening process, I think for most of them it will be in stages, not all in one blinding flash. They will first become aware of "a few bad apples," and then later start to see the broader pattern and the mechanisms built into the system itself. Reich serves as a way station, an intermediate viewpoint. And by defending capitalism, he stays in the good graces of the establishment, and maintains easy communications between himself and that audience of beginners.
I would give a similar evaluation to Bernie Sanders, whose viewpoint is similar to Reich's. But Bernie went higher in the ranks of power -- something he could not have done if he had been a real socialist. For a while some of us believed Bernie had a real shot at becoming president. That's not as good as a real socialist becoming president. But I figured it was a start, a compromise between what I really want and what may be achievable in the near future. So I worked for the Bernie campaign despite being quite a bit to the left of him. (It was like "Clean for Gene," or are you too young for that reference?) Bernie got a lot of national attention. Bernie woke up a lot of beginners. I think some, perhaps many of those beginners have now gone beyond Bernie's intermediate viewpoint, but it was Bernie who got them to start thinking.
Really, most activists in the left are (in my opinion) only partially awakened. They have seen the light on some issues but are still fooled by the Matrix on other issues. We have to work with them, because that's all we've got. The climate activists and the defenders of Julian Assange are not being cowardly in their failing to mention how capitalism is a related issue -- either they don't see how it's related, or they don't want to lose their audience, which certainly doesn't see how it's related. I think Bob Avakian might be right about everything (I haven't studied enough of his stuff to be sure), but the word "communism" is too difficult a sell in the USA right now. A better word for nearly the same message is "Resource Based Economy," but that movement is a bit vague and doesn't have a charismatic leader. Peter Joseph is working on a new movie, and I have great hopes for it, but we'll see. I've lost track of where I'm going with this, so I'll stop here.