Amos's River of Justice

Tag: same-sex marriage

  • Rick Wilson Blames Progressives for 2024

    Rick Wilson’s interview with Harry Litman is just one example of the wrong-headed analyses of Kamala Harris’s loss that have been making the rounds since the 2024 election. For the most part, Rick Wilson blames progressives for 2024. At 21:42 in the video, Litman asks Wilson what the focus should be for rebuilding the Democratic Party. Wilson answers:

    Stop looking over your left shoulder at the progressives because what have they proven to you this year? They don’t f**king care if you win or lose. They don’t care if you win or lose. All the garbage they put this party through and Harris through about Gaza, and the decisive number of democrats who voted for Jill Stein in Michigan because of Gaza..

    Wilson is probably correct about Jill Stein’s part in Harris’s loss. He is not the first to call this out. His claim is based on his organization’s model. The model shows that progressive and Arab Democrats made up enough of he vote that killed her (Harris) in Michigan. Then he continues:

    If these people, if the democratic party doesn’t realize that the progressives are not their ally, that they are a competing party inside their party, just like the Republican Party didn’t realize that MAGA was going to consume them…

    I disagree with this comparison, as I explain below.

    Wilson Says AOC Will Tweet Mean Things About Him

    Wilson laments that he’ll get a lot of sh*t from progressives, and AOC will tweet mean things about him. He insists that he is a practical politics guy, not an ideologue or a pie in the sky whatever. He believes in victory and if you don’t have victory against Donald Trump and his allies in the 2026 cycle, goodbye, it’s over. They [the Democrats?] need to go at the throat [of progressives?] all the time. “There’s no more ‘my honorable friend’ in the house or Senate. They need to go to war every single day to stop every Trump appointee.”

    Then Wilson goes to his focus on the trans issue. He cites the Trump campaign ads based on Harris’s past support for trans-friendly policies. Wilson doesn’t blame this on the Democratic Party. They were in fear of the left flank. Democrats have to overcome this fear.

    He insists that he’s not telling the Democrats to become Republican light. He’s telling them to be more like Bill Clinton, who won by being a non-traditional Democrat. Or Barack Obama, who ‘came across like a country club Republican’. Wilson’s anti-progressive wish list for the Democratic Party includes things like ditch the radical talk, the progressive fantasy world. Stop thinking you have to go out and campaign to talk to workers about industrial policy and solar panel jobs. Start talking to them where they live (which he implies is not in the trans world). This harangue against progressivism, or against Wilson’s definition of progressivism, continues until 26:31.

    Wilson’s Progressivism is a Straw Man

    It seems obvious that when Rick Wilson blames progressives for 2024, he’s not talking about progressives at all. He’s talking about the progressive fantasy world. And the progressive fantasy world is his own creation. Furthermore, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are not the way forward as he suggests. They are part of the Democratic Party’s past. Furthermore, they lost this election. In recommending them to Democrats, Wilson reveals his irrelevance to both Democrats and progressives.

    The Progressive Response

    Much of what I’ve written since 2016 assumes readers remember the exhilaration of calling out the madness in the Middle East and then discovering Bernie Sanders. I probably should have written about that process in the lead up to this election.

    We suddenly saw that it was time for a new direction. If this sounds overly ambitious, there was reason to believe that our leaders saw it too. Their foreign policy had been a spectacular failure, Libya being the most recent example before Gaza. And there were going to be repercussions that no one seemed concerned about.

    The Importance of Food Systems

    Bombs and white phosphorus were destroying food systems and farmland. Land and water resources and housing were in danger, while the global population was larger that it had ever been. By 2050, the population would reach 9 billion. We declared that it was time to stop the destruction. It was time to prepare for coming generations.

    Rick Wilson Blames Progressives for 2024
    Intervention in Libya, Credit: By Jolly Janner

    This agenda implied self-sacrifice on the part of progressives, but it had an enthusiastic following. I would argue that it was the blossoming of new life in the electorate. But the Democrats chose to cling to their failed worldview. Or perhaps they were clinging to the worldview of their donors. The blindness and arrogance were breathtaking.

    Progressives are the Loyal Opposition

    However, progressives are nothing like MAGA. We voted for Hillary in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. In 2024, I urged progressives to vote for Kamala. Then came 2024. We were told Biden was pressured to drop out of the race because of his health. His policy platform was not part of the discussion.

    However, Harris was consistently asked whether she would continue Biden’s policies. Questions about her policy proposals began to grow.

    This is strange, given the fact that Bernie’s candidacy had been scuttled by Barack Obama. He decided it would be Biden instead of Bernie. We voted for Joe Biden to keep Trump out. And then Biden surprised us by cooperating with the progressives. My point is that we had no reason to think we could hold Harris over a barrel policy-wise. The salient points were that she was young and healthy and not Trump.

    There was also the problem of Gaza. It is a problem. Voters, especially Arab voters, hated Joe Biden for his part in the genocide. Therefore…what? Don’t vote? Vote for Trump? It was a hard decision. However, progressives are not necessarily to blame. Gaza caused everyone anguish in one way or another. How could it not affect the way they vote? No voter should have to weigh the suffering of Gaza when they cast their vote. But that’s what they had to do.

    The Democratic Establishment Fought Progressives. The trans-rights issue came from them, not us.

    In 2016, the Democratic Establishment was thunderstruck that anyone would criticize their policies. They apparently thought everything was going well. Instead of accepting progressive criticism, they fought it tooth and nail. They fought our candidate too. It was almost embarrassing how openly they went to war against Bernie Sanders.

    We knew very little about Bernie back then. As it happened, his focus was not food and water security or foreign policy. It was more about elevating the domestic working class and alleviating wealth and income inequality. For progressives on the other hand, food and water security was tied to foreign policy. It was an internationalist outlook from the beginning. We knew that we can never be secure when so much of the world is in turmoil and so many people lack basic necessities. And this state of affairs was being driven by US foreign policy.

    If we had analyzed our differences with Bernie, we would have supported him anyway. Compared to the neocons and Conservatives, Bernie was like rain in the desert. However, we did have one thing in common with Bernie: none of us was even thinking about the trans issue or same-sex marriage.

    The Indiscriminate and Undiscriminating World of Alternative Media

    The term ‘woke’ appeared quite early in our conversation. I don’t know where it came from. I would guess that the woman who first uttered it was a manifestation of establishment (probably Democratic) consultation.

    From the Republican side, a fear campaign was launched against the term ‘social justice’. I once used this term in reference to Bernie’s agenda. I didn’t realize it had negative connotations from the World War II era. But during World War II, this term was not used by the Democratic Party–progressive or otherwise. It was associated with Father Charles Coughlin, an American right-wing supporter of Adolf Hitler. Of course the Republicans didn’t mention that in 2016.

    Leading up to the 2016 election, YouTube pundits began encouraging progressives to vote for either Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein. I objected in their video comments and on my blog. I said that telling young voters to choose between two candidates is not a strategy. But they continued.

    Jill Stein has been lauded consistently over the last decade by Chris Hedges. Hedges appears to be a progressive but he always seems to be working against the Democratic Party.

    Trans Rights

    No one has ever explained to me how same-sex marriage and trans rights are progressive. At least not in the sense of 21st century progressivism. Our focus is the survival of the human race, which is threatened by war and unsustainable agricultural systems. We’re not just promoting the survival of the human race. We are in search of a fulfilling and productive existence for everyone.

    But the celebration of same-sex marriage and trans rights seemed to appear on the scene as part of a full-scale blitz. Certain ‘progressive’ YouTube pundits suddenly appeared with over ten thousand followers and they immediately joined in the celebration.

    We support policies that fight discrimination. This includes discrimination against same-sex couples and trans people. But same-sex marriage and trans rights do not take precedence over survival in the progressive agenda.

    The 2024 Election

    When Benjamin Netanyahu attacked Gaza in spite of Americans’ warnings and objections, I predicted that he would continue to pound the people of Gaza until the election. And that’s what he did. Today everyone agrees that Israel’s behavior hurt Joe Biden’s chances in the 2024 election. Of course it did. It was meant to hurt Biden. Netanyahu wanted Trump to win the election.

    Wilson blames Progressives
    Palestinians inspect the damage following an Israeli airstrike on the El-Remal aera in Gaza City on October 9, 2023. Israel continued to battle Hamas fighters on October 10 and massed tens of thousands of troops and heavy armour around the Gaza Strip after vowing a massive blow over the Palestinian militants’ surprise attack. Photo by Naaman Omar apaimages

    The voters were herded like cattle on market day. That’s how Trump won the presidency. and it didn’t happen in a media vacuum. Influencers on YouTube and in Michigan pushed the strategy of punishing Biden in the election. It was obvious to most people that helping Trump get elected would not be good for Gaza, but the influencers continued anyway. These influencers included Benjamin Netanyahu, Chris Hedges and Jill Stein.

    It’s not the first time voters have been herded. However if Trump has his way, it will be the last time. No elections, no voters. I could lecture you that strategic thinking and voting is important in a democracy. However, even if a majority of Americans could be influenced by such arguments I would be closing the barn door after the cows got out.

  • Why Worry About Same-Sex Marriage and Trans-ideologies?

    Why worry about same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies? This article is not a rejection of same-sex partners and trans people. It’s a request for the missing narrative about hetrosexual relations and how they affect social organization. Currently it is being drowned out by a particular version of a patriarchal narrative.

    It is more helpful to talk about heterosexual relations

    The problem is one of focus and proportion. If this conversation is supposed to be about organizing a just society for our children and grandchildren, the same-sex marriage and trans-rights movements should not be dominating it. But the goal of this article is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. It is to supply the missing parts of the conversation. Women need to talk about heterosexual relations and marriage. Failing to recognize this need assures that an agenda will be imposed on them, and therefore on their posterity. Unfortunately, the female role is recognized and valued by the powers that be, much more than it’s valued by women themselves.

    Same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies: an imposition on women

    Gay and trans people deserve freedom from violence and discrimination, but this can be said about every minority group in the world. We all deserve freedom from violence and discrimination–even women. However, same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies have not only taken over the conversation, they currently dominate the conversation. The overall effect is an imposition on women.

    Same-sex marriage increases the market for adopted and surrogate children; trans-ideology tells women they have no right to deny biological men access to women’s spaces. Women don’t even have a right to tell biological men they are men. The trans-rights movement appears to be in a state of denial. It is women who will create the families of the future. However, it may not be denial at all. Appearances can be deceiving.

    An over-emphasis on Same-sex marriage and trans ideologies, and an underemphasis on women is anti-social and unsustainable.

    How are these movements anti-social? Women are the center of family relations. Movements that impose on women while refusing to admit this imposition are antisocial. How are they unsustainable? They are unsustainable because they depend on the misfortune of other people, especially women.

    The anti-social aspects of the trans movement include biological men invading women’s spaces and women’s sports. The anti-social potential of same-sex marriage comes about when the partners feel entitled to adopt children. This potential may be increased by same-sex marriage.

    Legalizing same-sex marriage makes a son’s homosexuality more acceptable to his parents. It can be argued that this is a positive effect. However, it goes too far. Same-sex marriage equalizes the son’s social status with heterosexual marriage, and indicates to his parents that there will be grandchildren. This might seem to improve relations within that particular family, but it imposes on other families. There is a potential for adoption regardless of whether same-sex couples really want children. Same-sex partners may not choose to adopt without family pressure.

    Taking heterosexual relations for granted is the real problem.

    If we believe these movements are anti-social and unsustainable, what can we do about them? That is probably the wrong question. I believe these movements are dominating the conversation because heterosexual relations are taken for granted. Women take them for granted at least as much as men do. In fact, it’s likely that women take heterosexual relations for granted to a much greater degree.

    Women need a conversation about heterosexual relations and marriage in general, preferably with input from the parents of women. I propose the following key factors in a properly organized society: marriage customs which involve parents and which are understood by each family in a community; an economy that does not extract excess wealth from the citizenry; a cleansing of racist and misogynistic beliefs and doctrines. They could also set priorities. For example:

    1. Marriage customs within the family must include financial protection for brides and their future children. This requires a citizenry that can hold on to its wealth.
    2. If the citizenry is to hold on to its wealth, the modern state must go. The modern state is structured to extract wealth from the people.
    3. The influence of the Greeks, starting at least as early as Plato, must be purged from our religion, education, and philosophy. Greek influence is imperialistic and misogynistic. At its core is a disguised rivalry between patriarchy and motherhood.

    Change must start with families

    The goal is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. The goal is to focus on heterosexual relations. Several posts will be necessary to expand on these factors. Unfortunately, even though the conservative ruling class claims to support traditional families it is likely they will not support this. And in my opinion, we should not be under any illusions that we can prevail in the event of a debate. Then what am I suggesting?

    Why worry about same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies? I believe they are a symptom. I’m arguing that the problems we face today cannot be solved under our present cultural, social and economic conditions. If we don’t understand this, our efforts will be a waste of time and energy. We may be able to implement smaller measures, but even under the best scenario we will still be left with the system that led us to this place. The goal is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. The goal is for women, (and the parents of women) to supply the missing narrative about heterosexual relations and marriage, and how these relations influence society

  • Progressives Are Not the Democratic Establishment

    We call our movement progressive. Most progressives know what that means. It’s clear to the candidates and it’s clear to the voters. Unfortunately, the Right seems to think ‘progressive’ is a synonym for ‘woke,’ and they happily use it to malign everyone, from the Democratic establishment to socialists. Progressives are not the Democratic Establishment. In addition they don’t represent the Socialist Party. However, some progressives lean toward solutions that are more socialist than capitalist.

    We Are Not Twentieth Century Progressives

    In our most important policy positions, we don’t really resemble the progressive movement of the early twentieth century either. For example, progressive reformers of that period accepted the suppression of voting rights, as well as policies restricting immigration.  On those two issues alone, we are miles apart from them. Again, this doesn’t seem to be important to the progressive candidates in the trenches. They know who they are. The Right doesn’t appear to know it however. It insists on lumping today’s progressives with today’s political establishment as well as yesterday’s socialists and communists.

    Is The Right Just Pretending it Doesn’t Understand?

    Is the Right pretending that progressives and their policies are the problem, or do they really believe it? Maybe it is a mistake, after all. Or maybe both bourgeois parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, use each other as straw men so that they don’t have to respond to the common-sense demands of progressives.

    The Church of England Thinks Same-Sex Marriage is a Progressive Project

    The easiest way to demonstrate the resulting problem in the conversation is to return to Gavin Ashenden, who with many other members and clergy of the Church of England, has left the Church over its decision to bless same-sex marriage. I don’t necessarily disagree with him on this issue, but I disagree with his analysis of the problem. I also disagree with his assumption that same-sex marriage is a progressive project.

    Same-Sex Marriage is Blamed on Feminism

    Ashenden argues that feminism is the root of the problem, and that it was always going to lead to same-sex marriage, or at least to the acceptance of homosexuality. This is an obvious disconnect. Acceptance of homosexuality is not identical with same-sex marriage. And the legalization of same-sex marriage does not naturally imply that the Christian Church must bless these unions. However, he may have a point about feminism.

    Modern feminism is a product of the bourgeois Democratic establishment. Inconveniently for our right-wing critics, progressives disagree with most of the policies of the Democratic establishment. This includes CFR and CIA feminists. They are really just meritocratic, elite hawks. That is not who progressives are.

    The Issue of Gender Rights Did Not Originate with Progressives

    Ashenden follows his logic to also lay the issue of gender at our doorstep. However, many progressives disagree that this issue is progressive. It is true that some well-meaning progressives accept it as progressive, but whatever you think of this issue it didn’t originate with us. It sort of appeared out of nowhere. That should inspire more curiosity than it has.

    So, Who are Progressives?

    Progressives today are big-picture, internationalist progressives. Climate change, food and water insecurity, and class warfare are global problems, and it simply won’t work to save privileged islands of the global population and leave others to die. Aside from being cruel and self-centered, the world is too connected for that. We all need each other.

    Same-sex marriage and transgender acceptance, on the other hand, are not big-picture issues. Their function seems to be to annoy religious and conservative men. I think it also serves to distinguish the Democratic establishment from the Republicans.This is necessary because their policies are similar.

    The statements made in this article might decrease the confusion for progressives. Unfortunately, if the Right is purposely categorizing progressives with the bourgeois establishment, they will probably continue to do so. Nothing I have said will make any difference to them.

  • Why Should I Care About Same-Sex Marriage?

    I’ve been wondering if the determination to control the message might explain the White House guest list for the Pope’s reception. ((Vatican pushes back over White House invite to Catholic Dissidents, Catholic New Agency, September 18, 2015. Available: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/vatican-pushes-back-over-white-house-invite-to-catholic-dissidents-51001/))

    I say this because I’m getting tired of the same-sex marriage issue taking over the conversation.  In fact, I’m tired of the LGBT issue, period.  I ended up writing this blog because of Wikipedia’s misogyny–women’s rights were my focus and with good reason–but instead of making headway on this problem women have been blindsided with legislation limiting reproductive rights, while in the same period the same-sex marriage initiative has been a great success.

    It’s not hard to make the case that fighting misogyny is more important to our society than same-sex marriage.  Half the U.S. population of 319 million is female while Americans identifying as gay or lesbian make up only 1.6 percent of the population, and those who consider themselves bisexual represent only .7 percent. Yet the LGBT issue vaults ahead, both in the media and in the courts.

    Many thought it was surprising that the Supreme Court approved this measure, but considering the character of these justices this should have made us suspicious about the potential uses of this issue.  What has happened here, besides the drowning out of women’s issues in the media, is that women have finally been made irrelevant.  Now men can marry and adopt children, while single women continue to lose their babies to adoption.  

error: Content is protected !!