Reclaiming Radical, Nanny and Pussy

When last I looked, before being interrupted by a planet-shifting major earthquake-tsunami-nuclear disaster in Japan, Middle America was protesting on the streets of Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and Ohio.

In Lawrence O’Donnell’s interview on March 10, 2011 with former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich and columnist Howard Fineman of the Huffington Post he asked both what they thought was the meaning behind Republican governors’ moves against unions. Both said the day Wisconsin Senate Republicans stripped their union-busting bill of budget provisions and voted to neuter collective bargaining rights of Wisconsin’s public workers, they sent a signal from the national Republican party fulfilling one of the goals of their leadership. This was, as Rachel Maddow aptly described, a mission to destroy a principle Democratic-leaning money base — the unions — ultimately destroying the Democratic Party.

This move is a deliberate attempt planned to incense unions and workers enough to overreact, to make them appear radical to moderates, independents and swing voters, with Democrats paying the price in the end game — the 2012 general election.

Politics is a matter of framing the debate, and a means to sell your ideas — exactly like advertising.  If your product A is the same as product B, one way you sell it is through negative advertising: ‘better than the leading detergent in getting out grass stains’. ‘Radical’ is not an apology or an admission of a crime. It is a label to sell, used to define the extremity of opinion, perspective, gender or political belief, ostracizing the radical from the rest of the community. The Other.

So it appears regardless of whether or not you are a teacher in Des Moines, a garbage worker in Detroit or a cop in Cleveland, if you march on behalf of your union, you are to be deemed radical for fighting for the right to negotiate salary, health care or retirement. This is a classic Rovian ruse of divide and conquer, pitting one lower rung of the totem pole against the other, playing off the fear and distrust of government and public service.

You never know how news and news punditry is written these days. The template of [noun] plus [verb] plus [foreign-sounding name of assailant], followed by [Middle Eastern or African Country of origin] and adding the stock adjective [‘a known radical individual/organization’] is as familiar and precise as machine-made ravioli. Radical is also not the only way we’re being taught to perceive each other in this charged political climate.

The same goes for ‘nanny state’. Wiki describes nanny state as: a pejorative used to reference a state of protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Opponents of such policies use the term in their advocacy against what they consider to be uninvited and damaging state intervention.

Until certain people realize that behaviors like greed, prevarication, miserliness, lack of compassion and racism have no place in a modern world, then they will need continual ‘babysitting’ until they do. There are costs involved with this type of behavior: overcrowded schools, overpopulated prisons, economically decimated regions. You need nannies until children grow up. And I believe there have been way too many kids running away with public dollars without doing anything for the public.

Finally, what is this accusation by the right wing that accuses the President of letting women run his foreign policy, most particularly Sec. State Hillary Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and State Department Analyst Samantha Power? The insinuation (also known as a smear) is intended to subliminally emasculate the President — a man who respects women. Is there something the matter with that? The President is accused of being a pussy because he listens to women? This is a double whammy because it insults women and men who trust women.

So how about this? The President is secure enough in his manhood to let women decide, and is lucky to have strong, smart women in key positions in his foreign policy cabinet because the world needs women figuring out how to take care of things like hunger, genocide, equality, fair distribution of resources and environmental justice. We know what kind of fuckwits we’ve had doing the decision making before. And let’s face it, the President knows a strong person when he sees one. Look at his wife.

Re-empowering your inner outlaw is not difficult. Whether it’s radical, nanny or pussy we actually are surrounded by more friends than led to believe. Labels are used to sell products. They are also used to destroy competing brands. The use of labels in present day is a way to disconnect you from the ‘norm’, to take you down and shame you into submission — in other words, disempower you. Don’t buy it. There is no normal. Has anyone gotten that memo? Do not retreat any further. Do not try to hide who you are or what you believe and please, do not stop believing that you are indeed right. In today’s weekly issue, Eric says:

First let’s consider Mars conjunct Uranus. This is like a fiery creative impulse setting off an explosion of creative energy. I’m not sure who will glaze over wondering what the heck I’m talking about when I say this, since this experience is not usually on the normal buffet of consciousness. However, it’s something we crave: intellectual and creative passion. The thing about this feeling is that it can start to blow around all of the neatly pre-arranged concepts of who we are (cautious person, discreet man, honest woman, good husband, responsible mother, nice guy, etc.). Authenticity can indeed be shocking in our current version of consciousness.

Authenticity. We need to observe the wisdom of African Americans who re-appropriated the “n” word and made it their own. Its theirs to use as they wish, and not someone else. We need to do the same with the labels people put on us as a smear and wear them with pride. Whichever you choose, it is your label, and it’s not to be used as an epithet. It is not a slur or a joke. It is a badge of honor well-earned and long in coming. Radical for economic justice. Nanny for compassionate governance. Pussy for respect of the Earth and its children, and the end of conflict.

In 2009, Glenn Beck once said of the burgeoning Tea Party movement that they “surround you.” Well, if someone paid me a good $100 per day to ride around on buses to protest health care in this economy, maybe I’d do it too, but is it really authentic? They do not surround us. This is the last deception based on the desperate need to continue a grab for complete control of power and domination over your soul.

But this is what is real. The opposite is true. We surround them. From the farmers in Wisconsin pulling tractors on the streets of Madison in support of the public workers and union demonstrations against Governor Walker, to the women in the State Department telling the military they need to step aside and let them handle it in Libya. We’ve always been here. And we’re pretty fucking pissed.

Yours & truly,

Fe Bongolan
San Francisco