By Manila Ryce
Published Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008, 4:07 pm
Filed under: Videos: Political, Society/Culture, Videos, US Politics

6 Responses to “April Fool Fiasco”

1. How would you go about dismantling the system? Is protesting inside the system? Many people seem to agree something is seriously wrong, but few agree on what their better society would be specifically.

   CW
   04/2/08 at 9:20 pm
   
2. 

   From your mouth to god’s ears, brother!
   Look, this has always been my problem with 3rd Parties, as well as the Democratic Party for that matter. I mean, if I were to choose a 3rd party whose tenets were the closest in line with my own, it would be the Natural Law Party. Unfortunately, it didn’t take too long for me to realize that the party is comprised of nothing more than a bunch of intellectuals and philosophers, not to mention hippies, who, despite their very nice platforms, CAN’T GET A GODDAMN THING DONE!!!

   I’m a very big advocate for giving credit where credit is due, it’s my Libertarian streak. So despite my ire toward the ReDUHblican Party, I have always grudgingly acknowledged their monumental ability to set goals and accomplish them. Yes, most of their goals are Bad, but they still Get Them Done! I mean, in my home state of California alone, this is vividly demonstrated in Sacramento on a daily basis. Historically, California’s state government has always been a Democratically (Party-wise) led. However, the Republican minority wields such power that the entire legislative process, despite the vast Democratic majority, can be utterly and indefinitely stalled by only a few Republicans. So say what you will about the Ultra-Christian Neo Cons, those fuckers get results.

   To be fair though, does anyone really take April Fools day that seriously anymore? My guess is perhaps this guy and his little April Fools joke agenda were probably not considered That important in the upcoming election…

   PapaFigue
   04/2/08 at 11:44 pm
   

3. I usually agree with most of what Davis says and enjoy his videos, but lately he seems to be more interested in self-promotion than anything else. For one thing, I think this idea for an April Fool’s joke was a bit inappropriate.

   But even if you accept the joke, it was still just a joke. So the disappointment and even resentment that Davis has expressed towards the Gravel campaign for failing to follow through on the joke seems trivial. To say that he won’t vote for Gravel simply because of a botched joke is like saying you won’t vote for Obama because he’s a terrible bowler.

   Andy
   04/3/08 at 12:14 am
   
4. 

   In Davis’ defense, this is about a lot more than just a joke going wrong. It’s about the Gravel campaign’s inability to make things happen. You don’t want to give time and energy to a campaign if that campaign doesn’t know how to use it. If a dozen bloggers can work together and all synchronize to have a story posted at midnight, then there’s no reason why a presidential campaign should have a delay of 20 hours in doing the same simple task unless the people in charge of that task are completely incompetent. A few hours is acceptable. A day late is not. Davis is saying that if something this simple can’t get executed then it’s no wonder that third parties have so many problems with the big stuff.

   Additionally, doing what Davis does is hard work. He makes it look easy. Getting Gravel to participate involved many talks between him and his people, and various ideas bouncing back and forth until they were refined into something everyone could agree to. There was a lot of headache going into this and a short time to do it in. Then, before Gravel’s video was to appear, Davis made a video on his own channel to hype the appearance of the video Gravel was supposed to post. When it wasn’t posted Davis looked a bit foolish. He was hung out to dry and all the stress and organizing that took place was for nothing. He has a reason to be upset.

   About the only third party candidate who consistently has his shit together is Ralph Nader. Years before he runs, Nader knows what needs to be done and how to do it. It seems Gravel decided to run first and think second about how to do it. Sadly, the same goes for Kucinich. Both are fringe candidates, but they didn’t compensate for that with any strategy, or at least hire experienced people who would know. A big part of being president is finding the right people for the job and not some guy you know from high school. After working in the Kucinich campaign I can tell you that it was the blind leading the blind.

   Apart from Nader being the exception, I think the reason right wingers have their shit together is because they’re fascists. There’s no disagreement. One highly paid person gives the orders and everyone follows in lock step. I’m personally against parties in general because authoritarians always have an advantage over free thinking individuals. To get around this flaw, we should be able to vote as individuals rather than groups. Representative democracy isn’t democracy.

   On a side note, the April Fools joke was my idea. Davis doesn’t deserve blame for whether it was in poor taste or not. All criticism regarding the joke itself should be directed towards me.

   Manila Ryce
   04/3/08 at 2:02 am
   

5. I understand the frustration on whether voting for fringe candidates make a difference or not, since there really isn’t any substantial gauge to make a definitive statement on the subject.

   A brief overview of the significance of third parties:
   If you look at a history of various third parties or third party-esque movements: women’s suffrage, labor, abolition, civil rights, worker rights — it’s visible that none of these had much success in the political arena. But, what matters most is that these movements, in many cases parties, brought the issues onto the national scene and willed themselves into the National conscience. Eventually the issues espoused by these third parties garnered enough support and was adopted by one of the two main parties.
   I’m not stating these advances in democracy would not have occured if fringe parties didn’t exist, but, I think fringe parties pushing the issues atleast hastened the process of change.
   Fringe parties also set a standard by which to compare the mainstream parties. Without outside parties defining the positions of liberal vs. conservative, corporate vs. people, the Democrat’s and Republican’s merging will continue to go unchallenged on the national level.

   With that out of the way, your inquiry was whether our energy would be best served towards dismantling and changing the system from the outside rather than an ideological alliance with any particular politician.

   Now, I don’t really see how we are going to achieve dismantling the system from the outside without a violent revolution. We can take steps like a general strike, boycotts, protests, etc.al., but these would be meaningless [/I]unless we translate it into political power.[I]

   While the current sytem is flawed, dirty, and corrupt it’s not incurable. You can fight ballot access laws. You can push for public financing. You can fight for electoral reform. You can expose corruption. You can take on lobbyists by organizing grass root efforts. These changes can be won.
   On another point, supporting fringe parties who are challenging flaws in the institutional structure is in itself “working to change” the system; it’s not a waste of time. Besides, presently the only time the majority take politics seriously is during the electoral season, our views must be heard then.

   Now, don’t misunderstand however, I thoroughly believe we need to continue pushing pro-justice policies irregardless of the electoral years.
   Also, our efforts must be based on support of an issue rather than ideological alliance to a candidate. Example: an anti-war coalition should not be based around any one candidate, but should be based around the issue at hand, anti-war. (This was the crucial flaw in the Paulites a.k.a. Ron Paul revolutionaries).
   That being said, I don’t see how it hurts to support a candidate who champions your stance on the issues…

   Tom
   04/3/08 at 2:31 am
   

6. Davis Fleetwood did not deliver his part of the video on time.

   Will you hear that from him? No. His ego gets in the way.

   Skyler
   04/3/08 at 8:08 pm
   

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Tired of filing this information out everytime you leave a comment at the Largest Minority? Why not register as a user? You also get full access to our forum!

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>