Fighting Bobfest

Wow.  Last Saturday was amazing.  Went up to Madison with Sam Borgos and Susie Smela for Fighting Bobfest, a yearly left-convention in honor of Robert M. "Fighting Bob" La Follette.  I assumed everyone knew who he was, but very few people in my dorm (even the Wisconsin natives!) did, so here's a quick summary.
     Most important Progressive leader of the late 19th-early 20th century, as governor of and then senator from Wisconsin.  Successfully fought for women's suffrage, progressive taxation, state control of railroads, university influence in policy-making, the initiative, the recall, and referendum, and the abolition of child labor, as well as a host of union-friendly measures, aided by the oratorical and organizational skills of his brilliant wife, Belle.  Later in his life, he led the opposition to our entry into World War I and, importantly for my current endeavors, bolted his party to run a left-wing third-party candidacy in 1924, winning over 15 percent of the vote, and carrying Wisconsin.  He also enjoyed hairdressing.
    This year's lineup of speakers was truly exceptional.  I finally got to hear Tammy Baldwin speak, and it redoubled my enthusiasm for her.  I wish she had a campaign of her own for which I could volunteer, but all Democratic operations are structured around the presidential election, meaning all activities, even those paid for by Baldwin's own campaign, treat her as an afterthought.  This really isn't fair, as she has rather different views than the president, especially on foreign policy, and much more backbone when it comes to domestic.  She's the first mainstream Democrat I've heard make tariffs a big issue, which is important both from economic and environmental standpoints.  She hit her stride, and the crowd loved her.  Spoke a lot about how proud she is of her grandparents, how hard they worked to raise her, and how much they cared about social justice.  This of course made me think of Nanny, I wish she could have come with us.
     The next speaker was Mahlon Mitchell, our last nominee for Lt. governor, and president of the Firefighters' Union.  That man...  I'm still breathless just thinking about it.  Such a hardcore stance on behalf of the workers, who candidly addressed the sellouts of not only conservative Democrats like Barrett and Obama, but also the overly cautious union leadership which bears part of the blame for the American proletariat's lack of organization.  He works a crowd better than any politician I've seen, especially an informed crowd.  He also has a very amusing routine of "trying not to curse" but it always slips out to much merriment.  He's also a damn fine-looking young man, and I can't think of anyone I'd rather see launch a long-term political career.
     Gwen Moore (Milwaukee's congresswoman), spoke after the midday break (during which I got my well-annotated copy of Professor Nancy Unger's definitive La Follette biography signed!).  She could work the crowd too, and offered the best voice on women's issues I've ever heard, and that's saying something!  I think the best way to describe her is "warrior mother", so driven, so principled, and so overwhelmingly concerned for people.  She went through a nicely consistent oration, describing the conservative attacks on students, workers, women, teachers, veterans, environmentalists, gays, the retired, ending each stanza with the question "Are you going to let them kick you out of our family?"  She brought the house down, and I teared up more than a little.
    Buddy Roemer spoke too, and while he's rather conservative on many social issues, he's a true populist on the power of business to corrupt society, and spoke very eloquently.  Something about hearing social injustice excoriated in that Louisiana drawl...  He's a real Kingfish.  Long would be proud.
     The day reached its saddest point with the speech of Greg Palast, an expat BBC journalist who's so awesome he has a hard time getting back into the country.  He's best known for documenting how Republican caging operations routinely invalidate the ballots of nearly 20 percent of all black voters, giving Bush the presidency in 2004.  His speaking style struck me as a combination of my own with that of the fictional Dr. House.  Also, the man wears a fedora in 2012.  Gotta give him credit for that.

Jill Stein and Bill McKibbon spoke too, but I didn't hear them, as I was canvassing the fairgrounds for Rocky Anderson.  (got two more electors, and another today-the end is in sight!).  Came away fired up and ready to go.  I'm definitely going every chance I get over the next few years.

Solidarität
Kamerad Graham

Are women the property of their employers?

The Missouri legislature just overrode a rare courageous veto from Governor Nixon on the issue of insurance plans.  In Missouri, employers may now unconditionally keep their female employees from purchasing family planning services through their insurance provider.  Possible effects include-

More abortions- less family planning means more unwanted pregnancies.


Dangerous precedent- now that religious grounds are all that is needed for an employer to assert patriarchal authority over female employees whose sexual behavior he wishes to control, what guarantee of safety is left to Missouri's women?

I rather think, however, that their ultimate goal is simple- to prevent even a handful of women from being economically independent is a victory in their eyes.  They want women to have to have babies at the command of their Lord, and leave "man's work" for "man".  This bill will by no means keep all women from working, but it will make it more difficult for women to control their own bodies, and keeping the burden of paying for basic health care -which saves all society money- firmly anchored upon working women, rather than their Capitalist Patriarchs.  Glorious day for the army of the Lord, I suppose- if even one woman has an unintended pregnancy and is pressured into keeping the baby, and leaves her job, a man can take it and restore the proudest of American traditions- chauvinism.

I try not to blog angry, but...

Superman: American Subversive (and why that's ok)

As you should know, I'm something of a nerd.  This has long extended to vintage DC comics of the 1930s and 40s, which, aside from their entertainment value, are an interesting window into pop culture of past decades, and yes, I just like comics.  I've chuckled at the implications of the stories, of the simplistic villains, and the cloying patriotism of the war years.  (There's also the instance of Robin exhorting the children of America to be "Regular", a battle cry to conformity or bowel movement, depending on your perspective).  Aside from the typical and comical scenes of Batman outwitting the police before his inclusion as an "honorary member" in 1941, the message is what you'd expect from a period piece aimed at impressionable children- follow your country, the only villains you must face are the foreign, the disabled, and the active women.  It hit me recently, however, that the first twenty or so issues of Action Comics (which introduced Superman in its debut publication), there's quite a bit of creative daring at work.

     The very first act Superman performs for the benefit of America's impressionable youth is MAN-HANDLING THE GOVERNOR IF ILLINOIS TO COERCE A PARDON OF AN (INNOCENT) CONDEMNED WOMAN JUST AS SHE IS BEING SETTLED INTO THE ELECTRIC CHAIR.  This really is exciting, as we see not only the possibility of official error, but also the danger such error poses, and, most importantly, the notion that truth and justice is more important than official opinion is really a bold statement for the times.  Just remember, this is less than two decades after the mass censorship and repression of the World War I era, and a children's magazine dared to point out flaws in government which would, if left unchecked, cost an innocent woman her life in an exceptionally brutal fashion.

     But wait, you say.  The trope of mistaken identity in criminal proceedings is nothing new, and Superman deserves no special recognition for using it as a showcase for his power and character.
Fair enough, but this was his first appearance ever, and forecast a pattern of behavior that can only be described as subversive.  One of Superman's next appearances involves him infiltrating a prison to expose the cruelty of the guards and the mistreatment of the prisoners.  Not once are the crimes of the inmates mentioned, only their rights to decent treatment in prison.  This was in the 1930s, when the country made extensive use of slave labor by prisoners, under conditions even more brutal than those of today. 
      Further stories depict Superman battling cruel foster care facilities and corrupt policemen, both far more loathsome than their comic-relief counterparts in Batman stories of the area.  One of the earliest truly detestable Superman villains is "100%" O'Reilly, policeman extraordinaire who conspires to graft vast sums of money as a reward for stirring up lynch mobs and intimidating citizens.  Most memorably in one issue Superman dares to confront juvenile delinquency head on- by a frank discussion of poverty and the hopelessness that had already infested American cities, and, rather than punching the young "criminals" into a prison, he provokes the government into renovating the slums and constructing massive public-housing projects.  Simplistic?  Yes.  Courageous in its daring to blame the system rather than the victims?  Very yes.

     These writers were kids, daring to publish children's literature openly criticizing standard government practice, and their creation has become immortal as an American icon.  This most-loved creation of American pop culture began as a fearless reformer, who dared to stick it to bloodthirsty officials who in any other setting would have enjoyed the patriotic obedience of the people (and still do in real life, of course).  Daring to question existing social structures is always commendable, but from a 75 year old piece of children's literature it is all the more notable.  Before his transformation into a boy-scout-like champion of the status quo, Superman was willing to attack even villains with a stamp of legitimacy upon them, and to go to any lengths to help the people.  What does it say about us that our quintessential mythological creation originated as someone who would stop at nothing to help the people, even breaking society's conventions apart to do it?  What does it say that he proceeded to turn into a defender of the order of things, even the excesses of Capitalism?  It seems to me that the narrative of Superman as a champion of the oppressed is stronger when he acts from conviction, not from a sense of duty to those privileged few who dominate so much of our society. 

All right, I confess I'm tired, and have been listening to John Kerry and Joe Biden speak for the last 2 hours, so my concentration hasn't been 100%.  My point stands.  Hope to see your thoughts!