In my professional life as a scientist, we spend a lot of research effort on phenomena known as “phase transitions.” The most interesting of them are ones which are sudden and irreversible- for example, if you’ve ever had the experience of superheated water from a microwave oven, where it looks placid, but a small disturbance causes it to violently boil, almost exploding, you know what I’m talking about.
There have been lots of excellent movies about politics- Wag The Dog, In The Loop, Primary Colors, The Candidate… but the one I think is the greatest of all time deals with a phase transition in a social sense. The Last Hurrah was made in the late 1950s as television was really taking hold in American culture. And it was extremely prescient in that it perfectly captured the moment of political phase transition. Old school politics was relentlessly retail- as with the principal character in this film, a city mayor would have a true and deep love for his city, know anybody who was anybody (and that did not exclusively mean “the rich and powerful”), spend all his time taking the pulse of every community, and almost exclusively focus on what we now call “constituent services.” Campaigning was in person: appearances at funerals, weddings, bar mitzvahs, pancake breakfasts, lodge meetings, everywhere the mayor could be seen. And everyone knew exactly who he was and had stories to tell about how he helped them personally.
In this movie, Spencer Tracy played Frank Skeffington (a thinly disguised version of Boston mayor James Curley), a true old-school politician, who clashed with the social elite (rather than counting on them for funding) and was familiar to the ordinary folks. The film follows him (through the eyes of his nephew) during his last campaign, which he runs exactly like all of his other previously successful campaigns. But there’s a new element, a phase transition about to happen. The city elite find a telegenic young man, inexperienced and without any real ideas or principles, a tabula rasa made for TV. He runs a campaign that’s an early version of a modern political campaign, TV-oriented, all about image and appearance, and well-funded by the old-line old-money elite who hated Skeffington. The only thing missing is Frank Lutz doing a focus group.
And of course, Skeffington loses. The phase transition is irreversible. We have suddenly transitioned to modern politics.
So beyond this being an excuse for me to urge all of you to see this movie, and maybe tell me I’m full of shit for calling it the greatest movie about politics ever made, I wanted to reminisce a bit about my favorite politician, someone very much of that era. Mimi Dipietro was a city councilman for 25 years in Baltimore, a product of lower-middle-class ethnic white East Baltimore, and while not exactly the articulate and smooth Frank Skeffington, he embodied the virtue of truly being one of the people.
“I know how to do my job. I do it honestly, sincerely and I help everybody who needs help. Yes, I got a big mouth, and if you got it coming to you, I’ll give it to you. But I’ll help you. That’s one thing. I’ll represent you, and I’ll try to help you. “
And that he did. Have a problem? Mimi will fix it. Potholes, weeds, zoning issues, permits, Mimi was on your side and ready to use his power and influence to get it fixed. Despite his conversational abilities in English, Italian, German, and Polish, his battles with the English language were legendary, and the English language usually lost.
“I would never tell a lie. If I have to lie to you, I’ll deviate from you.”
“I have been to half a dozen political affairs lately, and each time I get a standing evasion.”
“The criminal justice system suffers from too much flea bargaining.”
Asked about why Baltimore was a great city (right after the Mount St. Helens eruption): “’Cause we ain’t got no volcanoes.”
My favorite Mimi story has, to my knowledge, never been printed. I know about it because a friend of mine was a witness. My friend was visiting Mimi’s office during the winter, when two of his constituents came in with a problem. “Our apartment ain’t got the heat workin’ and the landlord ain’t fixin’ it.” Mimi immediately got the city inspector’s office and the city custodian on the phone. “I got a coupla niggers in here that ain’t got heat! Ya gotta fix this for ’em!”
My friend, stunned, said, “Mimi, you can’t use language like that!”
The two constituents replied, “That’s OK, that’s just how he talks, we don’t care, we just want the heat.”
And two hours later, a city crew was at their building and they got the heat.
Mimi sounds like old man Daley and the alderman from where I grew-up.
Back in the day (before the mid 90’s), a job at O’Hare Airport was a government job so you would have to get approval from the alderman of O’Hare before you got any job. My mom worked as a translator in the international terminal and every year (always around election time) she would have to pay a visit to Alderman Pucinski and ask for her job again. She would go to the ward office, with my father, hat-in-hand and ask for the alderman’s endorsement. Every time it was the same: “Sure you can keep your job. Also, on a completely unrelated topic, I have an election coming up (or so and so is running for election) would you have time to go door knocking on my behalf?” And her answer was always the same: “yes”.
This old method of local government, while inherently corrupt, was extremely responsive to constituents. Everyone knew the local government was corrupt, but no one complained so long as the garbage was picked up on time, government jobs were distributed equitably within the ward, and crime was kept at a minimum.
I have no idea who my local representative is. I don’t think most people do.
Alderman are very powerful. Unlike most cities, which operate under a council-mayor or council-city manager system, Chicago’s aldermanic system decentralizes authority to the fifty different wards with regards to most issues that one associates with government (garbage, zoning, and development), although this has changed somewhat.
I run into mine in the grocery store all of the time. We stand around and talk for an hour. It is a small parish and we are two of the very few educated people around here. Plus we share an interest in local history. I seem to get along well with local pols. I have never asked any of them for anything so I guess they can relax around me and just shoot the breeze.
What is his title? All I learned by going to the city website is I can get a free composter.
He is a state representative. I feel sorry for the guy. Last time I saw him he asked how I was doing and I said fine, I stay home all of the time so I cant get in any trouble. He mumbled “I wish I could” under his breath. I guess everyone he runs into everywhere he goes wants something.
Poor guy. After some googling, I’m in unincorporated Orlando and am under some sort of commissioner, but can’t figure out which district. Transparent government my butt.
Sounds functionally identical to the mob.
That’s government in a nutshell.
Except the mob is accountable to someone…
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-04-07/news/ct-met-kass-0407-20110407_1_johnnie-s-beef-john-rice-machine
In Chicago, the line where the mob begins and government ends is hard to pinpoint
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-03-20/news/ct-met-kass-0320-20110320_1_outfit-bosses-36th-ward-frank-calabrese
Also, this. Special appearance by Anthony Spilatro (the guy who was beat to death in the cornfield in the movie ‘Casino’)
And by constituents you mean supporters. If you weren’t a supporter, you got the Steve Smith treatment.
It’s 100% impossible for me to even grasp the concept of an honest politician trying to help the people in Baltimore having ever existed.
I will watch this in exchange for more Jewsday Tuesday.
You know who else wanted more Jewsday?
Louis Farrakhan?
Ah, the women’s movement fav hero.
Literally me. I enjoyed the stories.
#metoo
Yo!
#metoo
Also, I enjoyed Polka King with jack black. Seems like a similar to Mimi.
Sounds like Mayor Richard J. Daley…
The confrontation was not created by the police; the confrontation was created by the people who charged the police. Gentlemen, let’s get the thing straight, once and for all. The policeman isn’t there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder.
Fuck you, you Jew son of a bitch, you lousy mother-fucker, go home. [to Senator Abe Ribicoff of Connecticut re: 1968 Dem Convention use of force by cops]
They have vilified me, they have crucified me; yes, they have even criticized me.
Correction, the antisemitic remark was supposedly yelled by Richard M. Daley at the convention (not the old man). If you look at the video, it’s junior that is yelling while Ribicoff was giving his speech. Also, Richard M. Daley has always denied that he said those words.
I’ve always joked Daley said “this order” but with his speech patterns it always sounded like he said disorder twice.
All the President’s Men = Piece of Shit
Enemy of the State = A bit over the top, but anything that makes the Govt. Surveillance State look bad is OK with me
Is Dr Strangelove considered a movie about politics? I like that one.
I’d say it’s political commentary/satire. I like that one too.
Also forgot the single greatest political movie of all time: Team America.
“I said I’d never die”
+1 “Dirka dirka Mohamed jihad”
Show your commitment by sucking my dick…
All the President’s Men = Piece of Shit
I remember enjoying the book, but I can’t remember anything about the movie. Was it really that awful?
Tbh, I don’t remember a whole lot about the book, either.
Bah, I’m thinking of All the King’s Men.
I dunno mam all this sounds very unlibertarian
You know who else could often be seen in films of a political nature…
Abe Lincoln?
Bless you.
Jenna Jameson?
She did a lot of polling…
Wait, did Il Duce just give Switzy a *narrowed gaze*?
Mussolini beat Swiss at his own game
He looks like George C Scott as Patton.
Fewer medals.
He did play Mussolini, too.
Luke Wilson?
Also i loved the thick of it and in the loop. I acuatlly had just vaguely heard of in the loop when I was with friends in Paris and saw it in the cinema and convinced them to watch although i did not know what to expect.
Let the word go forth from this time and place: OMWC is so fucking old, he remembers pre-vacuous local politics. We therefore know axiomatically that he has nothing of substance to contribute to our cultural conversation in the go-go 2000s.
Hell, he remembers pre-vacuum-tube politics.
I was a salesman for the Branly Coherer Company.
Hate the politics but the dialog writing (which is the meat of the movie) in Charlie Wilson’s War is pretty solid.
“’Cause we ain’t got no volcanoes.”
New Baltimore City Motto?
“We’re not Detroit!”
“…yet”
We’re not Detroit!”
Cleveland beat them to it
Heh. My college roommate was a partner with Luntz for quite some time. I think he finally quit because Luntz didn’t give a shit about anyone’s personal life. All travel and go go go all the time.
Also, I’d be remiss if I didn’t post this:
Fuck You, Baltimore!
Fun fact: the first time I tried to find that video after being shown it, all I could remember about it was challenge pissing and “we’ll fuck your wife”. For some reason, I searched YouTube for that. It… did not yield the video I was looking for.
HM territory?
I actually didn’t have to make a down payment after I won the challenge pissing contest either!
There’s a tendency to romanticize these older machine politicians. And I’m sure a lot of them were individually charming. But, in many respects, how different were they from gangsters (and historically, the various ethnic mobs were the machines’ enforcement mechanism. The Italian mafia just happened to be there when Prohibition presented a huge money-making opportunity). Yes, they served their people. Usually to the expense of anyone who wasn’t a part of their clique. And being a part of their clique meant obedience to them.
I would take the unpopular position that for all their faults, the old political machines were more responsive to constituents and tended not to branch out into mindless progressive territory of higher taxes and stupid culture war issues.
“stupid culture war issues.”
I’m sorry but no. The Italians and Irish had a lot of culture war issues with them as well.
Not really. They had ethnic strife. The stuff they complained about was jobs, crime, and other people mocking their ethnicity (look at the time when Richard J. Daley banned a Nelson Algren book from the public library, because the Polish deemed the narrative to be offensive to them). They cared about bread and butter issues and far less about bathroom laws or forcing their beliefs on others. Sorry, it is completely not the same, even a little bit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Michael_Curley
How is that anything but stupid culture war posturing?
Yeah, you keep wanting to discuss specific incidences regarding James Curely, who I have yet to mention once, which is a little strange to say the least.
And I’m really not sure how any of this relates to your point that the old constituents were just as focused on culture war.
Curley is the base of the movie OMWC is talking about.
And this is proof that there were plenty of silly culture war issues back then with various working class ethnics.
I’m sure his constituents voted him in based on the fact that he trolled the WASPs. That’s what those old Irish politicians were known for- not providing police and fire jobs to their fellow Irish constituents, but trolling WASPs. Like I said before, ethnic strife was always important, but you didn’t win elections based off of that.
Meanwhile, local Democratic mayors can’t win election if they aren’t 100% pro-choice (as if that has anything to do with local government) and in favor of pee pee laws. It’s exactly the same
That’s a strawman. I never said his popularity is solely due to trolling. But he certainly did it for political purposes and it helped his popularity.
Fine, it’s a straw man. You still fail to demonstrate how this is equivalent to a Democratic or Republican (but, they rarely win in big cities) having to espouse certain positions completely unrelated to local issues in order to win election. Social issues were less important to constituents than having a job and regular garbage pick-up. Today it’s the complete opposite, all local politics have been nationalized
Prohibition. National issue and very much a culture war issue as well.
Prohibition was very much a local issue than it was ever a national issue. And that was not done by ethnic groups- that was done by WASPs
Opposing Prohibition was not a culture war issue?
I think we have less of a problem with politicians not being responsive to their constituents and more a problem with constituencies being poorly defined and delineated. So you’ll have a group of people who strongly support a politician paired with a (sometimes barely) smaller group of people who despise him or her and another group who doesn’t regularly vote. While every representative system will have disaffected individuals, ours as presently organized seems to have very many. While not a majority most of them time within a district, they still constitute sizable numbers of people, especially when added up across the country. This, in turn, contributes to low turnout and apathy, perpetuating the problem.
I don’t disagree with this on a national level, but I don’t think local government is as gerrymandered. When you are dealing with a 10,000 person constituency you are going to try harder to please everyone as best you can
Also James Curley raised taxes. And how pray tell would these machine politicians pay for their public works.
I must have missed the part where I mentioned James Curley.
It might startle you to hear this, but throughout the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s Chicago enjoyed a ‘AA’ credit rating and produced balanced budgets. It wasn’t that uncommon (as it is now) to have big cities with balanced financial positions and surpluses. Believe it or not- they just didn’t spend as much. And they didn’t tax as much, either.
“tended not to branch out into mindless progressive territory of higher taxes”
WTF? The public housing high rises and the expressway construction were proggie causes fully supported by the political machines. The higher taxes and displacement pushed the sane into the suburbs.
Public housing= paid for by the federal government
Suburbs= funded in large part by the federal government
Highways= paid for by the federal government
Where is the local spending again?
And all the work went to machine-controlled unions.
Putting all that private property onto the public rolls meant the remaining properties get taxed higher. And the residents (aka voters) started leaving because taxes were higher. Tax rates were then changed (but only in the 2 Dem machine-controlled counties) such that residential rates were cut in half while commercial rates were tripled – causing those evil corporations (aka non-voters) to move to suburban areas.
Proggie causes.
the old political machines were more responsive to constituents
I think that depends on who exactly you consider their constituents. Yeah, if you were a party loyalist, they were there in your corner. On the other hand, if you weren’t, you were fair game to get fucked over to pay for all that constituent largesse.
Mimi took the idea of public service quite literally.
I have to agree with the scorn for any political machine politician.
Having moved to NY, what I find most breathtaking isn’t the amount of open corruption, but the fraction of people who don’t see anything wrong with naked corruption. I guess being ruled by Tammany Hall for the better part of ten generations just inculcated the idea that politics was about rewarding the people who voted for you, why else would people vote, if not to get something in return?
My “favorite” thing I’ve seen here:
-Gambling is illegal, unless you’re an Indian tribe.
-Governor meets with the tribes, says “give me x% of your casino revenue, or I will make non-Indian gambling legal, but only in counties where Indian casinos exist”
-Indians cave
-Governor goes on TV celebrating what a great thing he’s done for the people of NY. All the media types agree.
Great article. I think I’ll drop the three bucks to see it tonight.
Let SP and me know what you think. She hadn’t seen it until a few years ago when I told her it was obligatory and rented it from Amazon. She was delighted.
A good friend of mine’s mother is a DiPietro. Very much old Maryland working class Italian family.
Mimi’s first job was, as was true for a large proportion of East Baltimore, at Bethlehem Steel. It was hot, dirty, and hard work, and you had to pay off the foreman to get the job. Unlike many pols, Mimi remembered what it was like, and I think that was a lot of his motivation to actually work hard for his constituents.
They’re what I think of as the old-school working class Democrats. What Labour was in the UK for a long time. Most of the “blueness” of Maryland stems from folks like that: socially conservative, big believers in government as a problem-solver, not quite socialists but kind of the FDR brand of paternalist government. Seemed to mesh pretty well with their flavor of Catholicism: God makes the rules, you follow them and shut up about it, and tithe on the regular so the church can do charitable works.
OT, but hilarious.
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/utah_bar_apologizes_for_email_blast_with_photo_of_topless_woman
Why? Were they old, saggy titties?
Nope. There’s a link. Nice and perky!
Yeah, I’d peg her to be in her late twenties to early thirties.
Doh! I missed the link the first time.
A longer version of the same point
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the_King%27s_Men
tho i think a subtle point often missed is that “politicians never really change; methods do”
i suppose one can bemoan the loss of the need to press-the-flesh the way they did in ye olden days, and the need to provide for constituent’s material-wants and the ‘jump on a moment’s notice’ response to the most minor gripes of people with the least political clout…
you’d be a lot less nostalgic for this sort of thing if you actually spent time in neglected neighborhoods, and watched how urban city-councilmembers plied their trade.
collecting neighborhoods is how they gain their initial power. and they still do this same sort of thing: bend/break every rule in the book to build a little ‘base’.
I had a friend who worked as a fixer for a congressional rep in NYC. his job was to find people with these minor gripes, and bring the rep a laundry list of “rain to make”. Freebees to hand out, favors to do, license-approvals that needed expediting, fines that needed waiving, overdue-boiler-inspections that needed sight-unseen-approvals…
i recall once having a beer with the fixer, and him saying, “do you need an air conditioner?” I was surprised – no i’ve got one. its good enough. he continued drinking. “i’ve got a storage space full of them that needs clearing out”, he continued. I thought about this, “where do they come from?” He looked at me hard. “contributions”. He did not elaborate. The point seemed to be “many small favors are paid for with a few big ones”. the job of the political machine is to rotate “huge payoffs” made by very slimy big-interests, and recycle 80% of those payoffs back down to your ‘base’. The political enabling-fee comes on the back end, not the front.
If a politician is good at their job, you never see them ‘take’, and you always see them ‘give’. That’s the whole game: make the giving ‘visible’, and make the ‘taking’ part so convoluted and invisible that its easy to pretend it doesn’t really happen.
Socialize the gifts, privatize the bribes.
Today, most politicians are more indebted to a special interest group or the party (as deviating from orthodoxy can cost you an election, like it might Dan Lipinsky) than the community they serve. The old machine politicians were from their communities and relied on the support of their constituents alone to win election. Just compare the simple Bridgeport bungalow that Richard J. Daley lived in, next to people who worked at the stockyards, with Rahm Emanuel’s large framed house, equipped with solar energy panels, in the tony neighborhood of Ravenswood next to the home of doctors and lawyers.
The mentality is completely different
My wife and I lived in the same neighborhood as Rahm and there was always an unmarked squad car in front of his house.
The mentality is completely different
In part, yes. But the doctors and lawyers vote and pay taxes. Maybe, in addition to what I said above, part of the problem is that taxes fall so unevenly nowadays. Whereas, in the days of yore, everyone had skin in the game and needed to work to put food on the table, now only certain segments of the population do. Is it surprising that they would be the ones who ultimately seem to call the political shots?
I think the party identification thing has really hurt. Now, in a lot of places, all politics are national.
Some nobody local pol running for city council in Alabama say something racist in an interview? Well by God, we in San Diego will vote straight-ticket democrat regardless of who the individuals actually running for office are! We have to stop the other side, balance their power with ours!
The same can be seen from the other side: somebody I’ve never heard of is running to represent some NYC district I’ve also never heard of, and they said something favorable about gun control! Therefore we in Texas must vote straight-ticket republican no matter what to keep them from having power!
This isn’t the fault of local people being idiots, though they all are (myself included – everybody is an idiot).
It’s because the natty gov’t has sooo much power now, that almost all issues really do become national, because fedgov probably has an agency somewhere that regulates whatever it is you’re talking about.
Who are the Texas Democrats who would be more libertarian? Just wondering.
I didn’t have specific examples in mind, I’m using it to illustrate a general point about the nationalization of politics. I’m not making the comment “from a libertarian perspective”, so much as trying to expound a politically neutral observation (insofar as such a thing is even possible).
I actually was curious.
I’m not sure “nationalization of politics” is anything new. The Republicans were weak in the south for almost a century due to purely the civil war for example. Or the Great Depression and Watergate. That said the focus on what these politicians actually say making national news is certainly new.
Also this does imply that Texan Democrats and Republican in San Diego actually have views that are popular in their own merits which might not be true.
You bring up good points re: the old Solid South, etc. I should have been more precise – the instant media fixation on every utterance across the entire nation that could be seen as going against your “tribe”, and then voting accordingly, seems to be something new.
There was never really such a thing as the solid south beyond the national level. Republicans could win on the local level in the South before the 90’s.
State governments were Democratic as well. I think the Republicans had some influence in Tennessee in the Unionist areas.
I would like some examples. Not being snarky. Anything pre-1960s? Anything in the Deep South?
Really? Anything pre-1960s?
It’s difficult to provide examples, because most local elected officials run as ‘non-partisan’ (even in Chicago, although they get the endorsement of the parties often times). But, the notion of the Solid South was never true even on a national level. Eisenhower did incredibly well in the South, even though he was the first president since Reconstruction to propose a Civil Rights Act.
People use to view local politics as local, because the national government has less significant in their lives. In North Carolina, for example, Republicans were always competitive
The Solid South was strongest in the Deep South: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. Not only did they vote for Dem Presidents until the 1960s they didn’t elect Republican Governors until much later. Hell the Republicans didn’t even run candidates for governor until the 1960s. Not sure about state legislatures but the Republicans were in a very small minority if they even bothered to run.
Texas Republicans always had a gubernatorial candidate who would lose badly, except against Ma Ferguson, until the 1960s.
Not Sure about Florida and Virginia. Florida did vote for Hoover and Eisenhower.
Anyway the 1952-1960 elections and the reality of the State legislatures and Congressional Delegations show that the notion that Dems and Reps “flipped” in 1964 is incredibly exaggerated. Also the 1980 Georgia Senate race showed the GOP strength was in Atlanta.
BULL! I am no idiot…I am a fool!
“To take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ’em. “Gimme five bees for a quarter,” you’d say. Now where were we… ”
the process of ‘taking from x, giving to y, collecting political fee’ is the same.
you think there’s no more old-timey politics because you’re not actually part of any currently-politically-useful constituency yourself.
e.g. in my example, you’re the guy that already has an air-conditioner. There’s no point trying to give you stuff.
if you move in circles where political-influence DOES matter, you will quickly rediscover that the old-timey politics is very alive and well. go hang out with real-estate developers.
Its not really politicians that have changed; its the utility of certain constituencies. they go where the action is. as i said: if you spent time in genuinely shitty neighborhoods, you’ll fast discover that the rain-makers still operate more or less the way they always have.
That’s implying that ethnic groups were not “special interests”
You’re only recognizing the differences on the outside, the window dressing. Inside, everything works exactly the same.
Talk about politicians who are looking out for the peoples, has anyone been following this?
Zimbabwe do Sul
This is going to turn out well, right?
I forget who it was on this board saying that Trump should give refugee status to all the White South Africans. That would be an epic troll.
Not sure. But can you imagine the outraged screechings of the media? Yeah, it would be epic. They could all go to Zimbabwe now that the government there are begging the disenfranchised farmers to come back. I would highly advise them against the idea though.
Staying on the African continent would be contraindicated for any of them. I had tickets to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa and ended up not going because the flight and hotel costs were outrageous. I’m glad I didn’t go now just so I can say I didn’t voluntarily put any money into their economy.
Time for a reboot of Sun City?
I don’t know if it was you or Gilmore, but the they did a poll where Zimbabwians would rather live under the racist government of Ian Smith than the present. That shit speaks volumes.
Under Ian Smith they were employed and not starving.
I guess it’s better to be hated/discriminated against than starving.
Not to an American proggie with a full stomach.
I can’t remember the link now, but there was recently a very interesting documentary on South Africa recently. The situation is sort of odd because society seems divided into 3 classes. The blacks, who are the majority in government. The whites who run most businesses. And the ‘colored’ who are a disfavored and impoverished group living in shanty town type conditions outside of Capetown.
In the documentary, they were interviewing people in the colored community and most of them were pining for the pre-Mandela days when their life was much better than under the current regime. So why Mandela may have done something good, it has apparently went to shit since then. And now this.
But the crazy part is that even under the ANC, blacks are still suffering in large numbers. At this point, they can’t blame it on the whites but the current government will do so because it’s easier than actually showing some restraint and imroving the economic conditions for every South African.
The rising tide lifting all boats and all that. Envy is a very powerful force; even without decades of institutionalized racism, people typically find it more satisfying to tear down those above them than gain more wealth if people at the top gain more.
A rising tide lifts all boats in societies ruled by law and not by thug.
That’s why you pass a law dictating the height of the tide at which all boats must ride. Boom! Prosperity.
I seem to remember reading that the white community is divided between urban Brit-descended business owners and rural Boer-descended farmers and that most of the issues target the latter group.
Generally true, but a society bent on destroying an economically successful rural minority now can easily bend itself to destroying an economically successful urban minority. Once they’re out of the way, Cape Coloureds are plausibly next. Certainly, we’re seeing increased anxiety among the ethnically mixed.
Nostalgia is a powerful drug. Stalin is also highly regarded in Russia, and Ostalgie is a real thing in east Germany.
Plus, you stubbing your toe hurts you a fucking lot more than that time your grandad broke his arm.
It was repeated by several people, myself included. I personally copied it from an article on “American Thinker” rather than having come up with it myself.
Botswana has a long-standing offer to accept any white refugees from their neighbors in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Not many take them up on the offer because it’s a landlocked desert with an AIDS problem, but it’s otherwise rather nice. Lowest crime rate in sub Saharan Africa, and quality of life better than China, assuming you don’t have HIV.
I wonder what the U-Haul rates are between Gaborone and Harare in both directions.
“it’s a landlocked desert with an AIDS problem”
Like Las Vegas.
This is the sort of shit that pisses me off. The ANC and activists like Julius Malema are incompetent as fuck but instead of actually improving , they are blaming the whites for their fuck ups. They have to know that the end result will be bloody and fruitless if they continue harassing the Afrikaners but don’t care because all they want to do is increase their power and get some ill begotten money.
Gee, I’m glad there are no politicians or demogogues in the US that behave like that!
It’s a damn shame because SA was on track to becoming the first truly developed nation in Sub-Saharan Africa. I would’ve loved to go there someday. One thing is for sure: vengeance, venality and hate cross all racial and ethnic boundaries.
Nelson Mandela despite his many flaws understood that revenge and outright wealth confiscation would do more bad than good. He could have taken the course that Malema has decided to take and been somewhat justified but understood that the former Apartheid government was handing them a golden goose on the fucking platter.
That’s a bit of a pipe dream. SA *was* a ‘truly developed nation’. Unfortunately it was only held together by the willpower and efforts of a brutal racist regime.
The fall of apartheid and the establishment of a constitution was the glittering prize everyone was focusing on, but let’s not ignore the machinery under the stairs that predated the leadership of Nelson Mandela. The political (tribal, really) engines beneath that glossy veneer were still consolidating power and assets by intimidation and murder.
Mandela’s own wife was the leader of the Mandela United Football Club, one of the more savage crews active in Soweto. She was recorded at a speech in 1986 declaring “With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country.”. The fall of apartheid didn’t stop the killings, of blacks upon blacks, or blacks upon whites. It merely provided new avenues for action and opportunities to terrorize.
Such was the adoration of Nelson Mandela and his political capital that the societal rot was simply ignored, until less charismatic leaders came along who couldn’t distract international attention.
Fair point. But they inherited resources and infrastructure that other SSA countries could only dream of, even if it was the result of a racist regime. If the populace was able to set aside tribal factionalism, racism, avarice and revenge they could’ve built something great.
That, of course, sits on the assumption that people can resist such sins. So yeah, you’re right, pipe dream.
“they are blaming the whites for their fuck ups.”
Why wouldn’t they? It seems to keep them in power. Detroit sucks because of Republicans ya know.
The ANC is a racist socialist (with strong communist ties) party with a history of using violence for political gains. Why wouldn’t they be a fuck up?
There’s a tendency to romanticize these older machine politicians. And I’m sure a lot of them were individually charming. But, in many respects, how different were they from gangsters (and historically, the various ethnic mobs were the machines’ enforcement mechanism.
But they got things done! No aimless shilly-shallying and boo-hoo-ing about “How are we going to pay for it?” They built the roads and bridges which made this country an economic powerhouse, and if they had to break a few
eggsheads along the way, that’s just what the social contract calls for.Not a movie, but I’m re-reading the Foundation series right now. It’s been so long, I think I was in high school, that I don’t remember anything from the book so that it’s like reading it for the first time. Brought it up, because politics seem to be major part of the story. It’s… archaic. I think written in 1951, Asimov, as much of a visionary as he surely was for the time, couldn’t possibly foresee the internet or even electronic payments.
Arguably one of the Top Top Men stories.
Interesting book series and fascinating concept even if it does grate my libertarian impulses. The idea that you can predict the actions of humanity and plan accordingly is the ultimate in technocratic, neoliberal progressivism.
Except even in-series you can’t. One unpredictable event (charismatic leader with mutations that give him abilities) dicks up the whole thing, and you have to use active measures to try to keep the thing going in the direction you want, with no guarantee similar deviations won’t happen…
Dunno, in the context of Intergalactic Empire, what good is Internet? Your communications are still limited to the top ship speed, and the information is limited by what the ship will carry.
And electronic payments would go out the door by the time intro finishes, just like credit notes and property deeds for Carthage lost a bit of weight when Vandals took over.
The whole thing is just a thought exercise in “how could you mitigate the fall of Roman Empire” – Foundation pretends to be equivalent of monks copying books, but is in fact a conspiracy of secular-minded scientists to keep the flame going.
The American left are surely drooling at the thought of this.
Social Credit System
Well, that’s not Orwellian at all.
They need to think very carefully about instituting a system which would, of necessity, sanction vast swathes of their supporters.
Leftists never think of unintended consequences. Just look at the metoo bullshit. It has ensnared more of their own than anyone else. Did they learn? No, like I said, they would drool over something like a social credit scheme, because surely they would never wind up caught in their own trap.
If corruption is so good then why isn’t Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and places like Italy and Greece libertopias?
Also is the complaint that the US political class is too honest?
You cannot talk about political movies without mentioning this classic. It’s been quite a while since I have seen it, but I remember being horrified at how relentlessly creepy it was. It gave me the goddam night sweats.
Gabriel Over the White House is a 1933 American pre-Code film starring Walter Huston that has been described as a “bizarre political fantasy”[2] and which “posits a favorable view of fascism.”[3]
The movie was directed by Gregory La Cava, produced by Walter Wanger[2] and written by Carey Wilson based upon the novel Rinehard by Thomas Frederic Tweed, who did not receive screen credit (the film’s opening credits say “based on the anonymous novel, Gabriel Over the White House”) and received the financial backing and creative input of William Randolph Hearst. The supporting cast features Karen Morley, Franchot Tone, C. Henry Gordon, and David Landau.
Surprise!
“Gabriel Over the White House” is one of the most unique, disturbing and thought-provoking American movies ever made about politics. It raises interesting questions that are still relevant today in the era of Donald Trump, the alt.right, and a seemingly widespread general distrust of the government. “Gabriel Over the White House” is not a well-known film. But it is unforgettable in its theme and content.
Uh-huh. Trump, foretold.
What I liked about Gabriel Over the White House was its ambiguity.
*hangs monocles to reflect the sunlight, lights money-scented incense, has the orphan choir begin singing the Sanctus*
To the Glibhedrin:
I’ll be submitting another low-effort post tonight when I can get to the machine I use for that sort of thing. It is a little time-sensitive, so if someone could let Riven know to expect it, that would be appreciated. Thank’ee.
I gave her a heads-up.
Roger! I’ll keep an eye out for it!
Biggest mis-match since USA vs. Grenada
Bryan Caplan vs. Elizabeth “Mousy Catholic Communist” Bruenig
“even if I were an avid socialist, I’d be baffled by the way she tackles the issue.”
what follows is a beating resembling vinny jones + car-door to ESB’s noggin
Without reading it, I’m going to guess Bruenig goes all Plato, and Caplan smacks her upside the head with Popper.
Now I’ll read it. Should be fun.
I tried reading. Honestly, I did. But, Bruenig’s persistent suggestion that freedom is slavery, that people existing for their own desired ends are somehow unfree was starting to make me want to bang my head into my desk.
Ditto. I only got half-way through.
I’ve never seen so much projection in one piece. It’s clear that Bruenig looks at what she considers her own moral failings and projects them upon all of humanity.
I just don’t understand how erudite, otherwise intelligent people cling so relentlessly to an ideology that has done nothing but produce misery and poverty anywhere and everywhere it’s implemented. It actually is a mental disorder.
I used to think the ‘leftism is a mental disorder’ was over the top. I no longer think that is true.
Oh, you forgot to mention the mass graves.
On the other hand, isn’t she just preaching a more honest version of the same system pushed by most progressives? She’s clinging to an ideology that produces misery, poverty, and suffering because she believes that misery, poverty, and suffering are the source of moral worth. But, isn’t that a universal amongst progressives with their deification of victimhood? The only difference I can see is that Bruenig is open about the fact that her plans lead to universal misery, poverty, and suffering. She’s open about the fact that universal misery, poverty, and suffering is what she’s after. The rest of the progressives just like to convince themselves that it’s on the other guy they want to impoverish, make miserable and see suffer.
That is pretty good, but it depends on which ones you are talking about. Progressive leaders fully intend to ensconce themselves in palaces while the rest of us grub around in the dirt for something to eat. For them the whole thing is a game wherein they become royalty. They dont believe any of the shit they say. They are running a con.
i think you have the answer embedded in your observation.
“otherwise intelligent” = intellectuals think they should run the world.
But they look at the world, and see hard-working normal people being successful in the marketplace.
they realize that their mere intellectual capability isn’t by itself sufficient to be granted power and prestige and get respect and rewards.
So they reach out to the nearest thing that demands overturning results of the free-market: socialism.
That it comes with a side-helping of obscurantist gibberish rationales which flatter intellectual types… is just icing on the cake.
von Mises covers this well in The Anti-Capitalist Mentality.
Hayek says similar thing in interview w/ WFB
Also these “machine” politicians helped bring about the welfare state that ended up destroying their own political machines.
“ended up destroying their own political machines”
I dunno, it seems to still be working for pols and their cronies in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore etc. Regular people on the other hand…
Tammany Hall is not around anymore. Also the current Democratic machines are not the same as the old machines.
The ‘machine’ was the welfare system. If you mean that national politicians, who were a product of these machines voted for federal welfare then you have a point. But, there were also a lot of politicians that were not a product of the machine system that also voted for federal welfare programs.
Curley and Tammany Hall supported FDR. Daley supported JFK and LBJ. Truman was a Prendergast man. Robert F. Wagner was a Tammany Man.
Free shit from the Feds ended up weakening these machines since they couldn’t compete.