Skip to main content

This morning I received the following email from Rabbi Michael Lerner's Tikkun Network of Spiritual Progressives.  I looked for a LIKE link in email and on the www.spiritualprogressives.org web site. I wanted to find a way to share this and beyond pasting it my facebook page, I thought Daily Kos would be a perfect platform for helping get a wider distribution of this message from DANIEL ELLSBERG of 'Pentagon Papers' and Watergate fame. While I don't entirely agree with Ellsberg's assessment of Barack Obama, he is clearly the better alternative.  I trust neither Rabbi Lerner nor Dr. Ellsberg will object to my sharing this with you.



It is urgently important to prevent a Republican administration under Romney/Ryan from taking office in January 2013.


The election is now just weeks away, and I want to urge those whose values are generally in line with mine -- progressives, especially activists -- to make this goal one of your priorities during this period.


An activist colleague recently said to me: "I hear you're supporting Obama."


I was startled, and took offense. "Supporting Obama? Me?!"


"I lose no opportunity publicly," I told him angrily, to identify Obama as a tool of Wall Street, a man who's decriminalized torture and is still complicit in it, a drone assassin, someone who's launched an unconstitutional war, supports kidnapping and indefinite detention without trial, and has prosecuted more whistleblowers like myself than all previous presidents put together. "Would you call that support?"


My friend said, "But on Democracy Now you urged people in swing states to vote for him! How could you say that? I don't live in a swing state, but I will not and could not vote for Obama under any circumstances."


My answer was: a Romney/Ryan administration would be no better -- no different -- on any of the serious offenses I just mentioned or anything else, and it would be much worse, even catastrophically worse, on a number of other important issues: attacking Iran, Supreme Court appointments, the economy, women's reproductive rights, health coverage, safety net, climate change, green energy, the environment.


I told him: "I don't 'support Obama.' I oppose the current Republican Party. This is not a contest between Barack Obama and a progressive candidate. The voters in a handful or a dozen close-fought swing states are going to determine whether Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are going to wield great political power for four, maybe eight years, or not."


As Noam Chomsky said recently, "The Republican organization today is extremely dangerous, not just to this country, but to the world. It's worth expending some effort to prevent their rise to power, without sowing illusions about the Democratic alternatives."


Following that logic, he's said to an interviewer what my friend heard me say to Amy Goodman: "If I were a person in a swing state, I'd vote against Romney/Ryan, which means voting for Obama because there is no other choice."


The election is at this moment a toss-up. That means this is one of the uncommon occasions when we progressives -- a small minority of the electorate -- could actually have a significant influence on the outcome of a national election, swinging it one way or the other.


The only way for progressives and Democrats to block Romney from office, at this date, is to persuade enough people in swing states to vote for Obama: not stay home, or vote for someone else. And that has to include, in those states, progressives and disillusioned liberals who are at this moment inclined not to vote at all or to vote for a third-party candidate (because like me they've been not just disappointed but disgusted and enraged by much of what Obama has done in the last four years and will probably keep doing).


They have to be persuaded to vote, and to vote in a battleground state for Obama not anyone else, despite the terrible flaws of the less-bad candidate, the incumbent. That's not easy. As I see it, that's precisely the "effort" Noam is referring to as worth expending right now to prevent the Republicans' rise to power. And it will take progressives -- some of you reading this, I hope -- to make that effort of persuasion effectively.


It will take someone these disheartened progressives and liberals will listen to. Someone manifestly without illusions about the Democrats, someone who sees what they see when they look at the president these days: but who can also see through candidates Romney or Ryan on the split-screen, and keep their real, disastrous policies in focus.


It's true that the differences between the major parties are not nearly as large as they and their candidates claim, let alone what we would want. It's even fair to use Gore Vidal's metaphor that they form two wings ("two right wings," as some have put it) of a single party, the Property or Plutocracy Party, or as Justin Raimondo says, the War Party.


Still, the political reality is that there are two distinguishable wings, and one is reliably even worse than the other, currently much worse overall. To be in denial or to act in neglect of that reality serves only the possibly imminent, yet presently avoidable, victory of the worse.


The traditional third-party mantra, "There's no significant difference between the major parties" amounts to saying: "The Republicans are no worse, overall." And that's absurd. It constitutes shameless apologetics for the Republicans, however unintended. It's crazily divorced from present reality.


And it's not at all harmless to be propagating that absurd falsehood. It has the effect of encouraging progressives even in battleground states to refrain from voting or to vote in a close election for someone other than Obama, and more importantly, to influence others to act likewise.That's an effect that serves no one but the Republicans, and ultimately the 1 percent.


It's not merely understandable, it's entirely appropriate to be enraged at Barack Obama. As I am. He has often acted outrageously, not merely timidly or "disappointingly." If impeachment were politically imaginable on constitutional grounds, he's earned it (like George W. Bush, and many of his predecessors!) It is entirely human to want to punish him, not to "reward" him with another term or a vote that might be taken to express trust, hope or approval.


But rage is not generally conducive to clear thinking. And it often gets worked out against innocent victims, as would be the case here domestically, if refusals to vote for him resulted in Romney's taking key battleground states that decide the outcome of this election.


To punish Obama in this particular way, on Election Day -- by depriving him of votes in swing states and hence of office in favor of Romney and Ryan -- would punish most of all the poor and marginal in society, and workers and middle class as well: not only in the U.S. but worldwide in terms of the economy (I believe the Republicans could still convert this recession to a Great Depression), the environment and climate change. It could well lead to war with Iran (which Obama has been creditably resisting, against pressure from within his own party). And it would spell, via Supreme Court appointments, the end of Roe v. Wade and of the occasional five to four decisions in favor of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


The reelection of Barack Obama, in itself, is not going to bring serious progressive change, end militarism and empire, or restore the Constitution and the rule of law. That's for us and the rest of the people to bring about after this election and in the rest of our lives -- through organizing, building movements and agitating.


In the eight to twelve close-fought states -- especially Florida, Ohio, and Virginia, but also Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin -- for any progressive to encourage fellow progressives and others in those states to vote for a third-party candidate is, I would say, to be complicit in facilitating the election of Romney and Ryan, with all its consequences.


To think of that as urging people in swing states to "vote their conscience" is, I believe, dangerously misleading advice. I would say to a progressive that if your conscience tells you on Election Day to vote for someone other than Obama in a battleground state, you need a second opinion. Your conscience is giving you bad counsel.


I often quote a line by Thoreau that had great impact for me: "Cast your whole vote: not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence." He was referring, in that essay, to civil disobedience, or as he titled it himself, "Resistance to Civil Authority."


It still means that to me. But this is a year when for people who think like me -- and who, unlike me, live in battleground states -- casting a strip of paper is also important. Using your whole influence this month to get others to do that, to best effect, is even more important.


That means for progressives in the next couple of weeks -- in addition to the rallies, demonstrations, petitions, lobbying (largely against policies or prospective policies of President Obama, including austerity budgeting next month), movement-building and civil disobedience that are needed all year round and every year -- using one's voice and one's e-mails and op-eds and social media to encourage citizens in swing states to vote against a Romney victory by voting for the only real alternative, Barack Obama.


Daniel Ellsberg is a former State and Defense Department official who has been arrested for acts of non-violent civil disobedience over eighty times, initially for copying and releasing the top secret Pentagon Papers, for which he faced 115 years in prison. Living in a non-swing state, he does not intend to vote for President Obama.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It's my sense that Americans have been (5+ / 0-)

    subjected to three major hoaxes:

    1) That American industry and commerce are autonomous enterprises whose reliance on governmental support is minimal. The truth is that the public purse has been a consistent source of free natural resources for industry and commerce to exploit and the legislative branch has consistently jiggered the law to their advantage and the disadvantage of individual human rights, as well as the health of our natural environment.

    2) That the legislative bodies for the nation and the fifty states are mere rubber stamps for the executive and, especially on the federal level, have no control over the public purse and/or the currency that's issued by the Treasury.

    3) That the chief executive is a term-limited dictator whose authority is absolute, except for the need to be reviewed by the electorate. In other words, that democracy is just a selection process to designate a temporary royal, giving more individuals as opportunity to reign than would be possible if the selection were per DNA.

    Ellsberg, although he "braved" the king and helped unseat him prematurely, is apparently still in the thrall of number 3. Having somebody, some one person, to blame for everything is likely comforting. It also insures that the real culprits, our lazy and veinal delegates in Congress escape close scrutiny and get to play petty potentate unchallenged.
    The truth is that when government by the people is a real possibility (popular government), there are only two groups whose powers are in danger of being diminished: legislators and political party officials. Which is why the power of the electorate is being challenged by efforts to deny them the vote. The people are under attack. Innocents hardly ever expect to be attacked, which is why it is important to alert them.

    We organize governments to provide benefits and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Fri Oct 19, 2012 at 07:35:54 AM PDT

    •  Ellsberg risked far more than any of us would ever (5+ / 0-)

      dream of risking.  He understood the dangers of an out of control executive branch and acted accordingly.  Other than that, your comment is spot-on.

      One of my biggest disappointments in the past 4 years has been that the de facto elected monarch approach to the presidency is enshrined now just as much as it was enshrined from 2001-08.  At least this de facto monarch was actually elected.

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Fri Oct 19, 2012 at 08:11:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  To people who respond to the call to vote (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MarkC, bontemps2012, JKTownsend, raincrow

    for the "lesser of two evils" by saying "but the lesser of two evils is still evil!", my response is "Perhaps, but it's also lesser, and there is no Option C, so grow up and be an adult and stop chasing imaginay ponies. Complain all you want about what lousy choices we have, but at the end of the day you still have to choose."

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Fri Oct 19, 2012 at 07:36:37 AM PDT

  •  Swing-state progressives push Obama to victory (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bontemps2012, JKTownsend, raincrow

    I like that meme better than "Romney appoints John Yoo to Supreme Court vacancy".

    "Stare at the monster: remark/ How difficult it is to define just what/ Amounts to monstrosity in that/ Very ordinary appearance." - Ted Hughes

    by MarkC on Fri Oct 19, 2012 at 07:55:34 AM PDT

    •  Mark !! Do you have a little time to make (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JKTownsend, raincrow

      a list of Romney Administration actions ???

      I can guarantee you that kossacks will praise your faux-name unto the ages !

      Supply dates for these items for maximum effect.

      One way to do this would be to call for contributions, then edit them for your diary. The DKOS message system might be good for something !

  •  He could have said all that in ONE paragraph. (0+ / 0-)

    yeah, it's not a perfect world and we haven't figured out how to resurrect FDR.... film at 11.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site