Barry Grey of wsws has the grimmest but most reality-based analysis of Obama’s Tuesday night State of the Union message.
Grey:
The speech was actually one of the most reactionary State of the Union addresses ever delivered. Obama placed his “blueprint” for the US economy within the framework of a chilling celebration of the American military and its criminal activities around the world. Among the achievements he cited were the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan and the bombing of Libya and murder of Gaddafi. He spoke with particular pride of the extra-legal drone assassinations in Africa and the Middle East and concluded with a paean to the Navy SEALs who murdered Osama bin Laden.
These comments were interlaced with threats of economic war against China, diplomatic and political war against Syria, and military war against Iran.
Obama suggested that the American people would have to accept the militarization of social and political life in order to revive the economy and bring jobs back to the US. “Imagine what we could accomplish,” he said, “if we followed [the American Armed Forces’] example.”
The heart of his economic message was the claim that “the American auto industry is back.” He touted the rebound of profits for America’s Big Three auto makers as a model for the revival of US manufacturing as a whole, highlighted by the return of industrial jobs to the US and an expansion of American manufacturing exports.
What he did not say—but what every auto worker and everyone who has followed Obama’s “restructuring” of the industry knows—is that the return of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler to profitability and the recouping of a fraction of the jobs that had been wiped out is based entirely on the abolition of decent wages and benefits. The basic wage scale is being cut in half and benefits such as pensions and health care are being gutted for the new generation of auto workers.
Grey was not only justifiably scalding to the President but took on labor leaders:
The American trade union leadership can be counted on to resort to demagogy and lies in pursuit of its narrow self-interest. In its response to Tuesday’s State of the Union address by President Obama, the union brass did not disappoint.
AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and United Auto Workers (UAW) President Bob King hailed the speech as a boon to workers and a rebuke to big business. They gave their enthusiastic support to Obama’s “economy built to last,” which, the president claimed, was based on the revival of American manufacturing.
In a statement issued Wednesday, King said, “The president has demonstrated his commitment to creating an economy ‘built to last’ by restructuring the US auto industry for the 21st century…” King went on to boast, “All three domestic auto makers are bringing jobs back to the United States from other countries.”
Trumka declared that Obama “made clear that the era of the 1 percent getting rich by looting the economy, rather than creating jobs, is over…” Trumka particularly praised Obama’s trade war rhetoric: “President Obama spoke to the confidence of working people that… we can revitalize ‘Made in the USA.’ That commitment to American manufacturing, made possible in part by enhanced enforcement of trade laws being violated by China, is welcome news…”
snip
Wage-cutting on an unprecedented scale, the reduction of industrial workers to poverty—this is the key to Obama’s “economy built to last.” The plaudits for the speech by Trumka and King—who said nothing of wage-cutting—underscores a fact that must be grasped by workers fighting to resist this attempt to hurl them back to the slave-labor conditions that prevailed a century ago.
The support of the UAW and AFL-CIO (as well as the rival Change to Win union federation) for savage wage-cutting in the 2009 bailout of GM and Chrysler was not an aberration. The official trade unions fully support the destruction of the wages of their own members and the working class as a whole, and are determined to work with the corporations and the government to achieve that goal.
At one point Grey refers to the labor organizations as “corporatist labor syndicates.” He also discloses that Mr. Trumka took home $294,000 last year as AFL-CIO president (which Grey declares is ten times the pay of a newly hired Big Three auto-worker and Mr. King as UAW president got $153,000 last year (five times the pay of his new Big Three members), speculating on what personal profit-making these individuals will continue to enjoy in supplying industry with a pathetically low-wage American workforce. Mr. Grey:
Those who control these organizations and derive six- and even seven-figure compensation packages from their activities have personal and financial as well as social and political interests diametrically opposed to those of the workers. Trumka, King and the like see their role in helping to impoverish and speed up American workers as essential to convincing the corporations to bring jobs back to the US from cheap-labor countries such as China and Mexico. This is critical, from their standpoint, to halting and even reversing the decline in union membership rolls and the dues payments upon which their bank accounts depend.
For the same reason, the union leadership is wedded to the promotion of “America first” economic nationalism, trade war and imperialist aggression around the world. It ceaselessly lobbies the capitalist state to intervene against the international rivals of US corporations in order to protect its own selfish interests. In so doing, it works to block any unified struggle of American workers with their class brothers and sisters internationally and subordinate US workers to “their” employers.
Yes, manufacturing is coming back to the United States along with third world wages. The corporatists shipped our jobs overseas but now if we say pretty please and work for God-awful wages we might get some of them back. We can enter into a low-ball bidding war for work against Asians and Mexicans and whomever. As Grey points out, the US and global one percent gets to stick it to the global 99 percent by dividing up and conquering us.
Once again Barack Obama and a betraying corporate-cronied Congress take another gigantic step backwards into history. Deconstructing hard-won progress. So many union heroes and labor advocates in the past put so much on the line to protect and support the American worker. John Lewis, Mother Jones, Samuel Gompers, Cesar Chavez, RFK just off the top of my head. As well as the not so famous but noble and brave souls who risked livelihoods and even lives to bring the justice of a “living wage" to the American working class. They all must be spinning in their graves this week as Obama’s getting kudos for celebrating murderous globalization and the promise of job and wage CRUMBS to the American citizenry. All this, as the 2012 bureaucratized, cowardly union leadership gushes its gratitude.
The one percent wins another big one. Yet the media and Obama bubble people are making SOTU "happy talk."
Once again Barack Obama and a betraying corporate-cronied Congress take another gigantic step backwards into history. Deconstructing hard-won progress. So many union heroes and labor advocates in the past put so much on the line to protect and support the American worker. John Lewis, Mother Jones, Samuel Gompers, Cesar Chavez, RFK just off the top of my head. As well as the not so famous but noble and brave souls who risked livelihoods and even lives to bring the justice of a “living wage" to the American working class. They all must be spinning in their graves this week as Obama’s getting kudos for celebrating murderous globalization and the promise of job and wage CRUMBS to the American citizenry. All this, as the 2012 bureaucratized, cowardly union leadership gushes its gratitude.
The one percent wins another big one. Yet the media and Obama bubble people are making SOTU "happy talk."
WTF
?
?
[cross-posted on correntewire and sacramento for democracy]
--------------
Soon, the idiot will arrive and accuse You of writing like a "professional liberal."
Fear not, he will, as ALWAYS, adamantly, refuse to address anything substantively.
He may offer that manufacturing can come back at $0.75/hr., due to automation, which seems to be his slogan de jour.
-R-
Fear not, he will, as ALWAYS, adamantly, refuse to address anything substantively.
He may offer that manufacturing can come back at $0.75/hr., due to automation, which seems to be his slogan de jour.
-R-
Every time I hear a politician - let along the POTUS - praising the military as a model for American society as a whole, I start getting very afraid. (r)
Of course the response will be how much more awful it would be if a Republican from the zoo on exhibit gets the presidency. I wonder how much more awful it could become. A peanut butter and arsenic sandwich might taste better than arsenic alone but the result would be the same.
Hey, Libby.
You wrote something in your response in my last thread that bears tangentially on what you are saying in this thread. Allow me to raise it here.
You wrote, There would be more opposition to the one percenters if a Republican were in office.
You are absolutely correct there, Libby!
In my own case, I recognize and acknowledge that I am more understanding and tolerant of what I consider “objectionable behavior” in someone with whom I am in generally agreement than with someone with whom I am in general disagreement. That holds in my personal life with friends and family—and in my assessment of politicians and their political behavior. I suspect it is a more wide-spread human quality than most of us want to acknowledge—which, of course, is your point.
Voting Obama out of office and replacing him with one of those Republican “debaters” (which I think may very well happen)—will indeed open an avenue to greater opposition to the machinations of the 1%. A lot of us love to hate Republicans…but seem easily disposed to forgive non-Republicans.
I agree with you completely on that.
But there is more to the equation…and that is where we seem to part company. I truly fear the other NEGATIVE things that will accrue to our society if someone like Gingrich, Santorum, or Paul takes the Oval Office. I respectfully suggest that the crap they will carry in with them will far out-weighs the benefits of any “greater opposition” that will build. With Romney, I think the same consideration applies, even if I do think it will be of slighter less impact.
Be that as it may, I understand your point here.
In your response in my thread, by the way, you also noted the irony of you expecting an Obama victory in November, while I am thinking he will be defeated. On that, as I said there, I hope you are correct and that I am wrong.
You wrote something in your response in my last thread that bears tangentially on what you are saying in this thread. Allow me to raise it here.
You wrote, There would be more opposition to the one percenters if a Republican were in office.
You are absolutely correct there, Libby!
In my own case, I recognize and acknowledge that I am more understanding and tolerant of what I consider “objectionable behavior” in someone with whom I am in generally agreement than with someone with whom I am in general disagreement. That holds in my personal life with friends and family—and in my assessment of politicians and their political behavior. I suspect it is a more wide-spread human quality than most of us want to acknowledge—which, of course, is your point.
Voting Obama out of office and replacing him with one of those Republican “debaters” (which I think may very well happen)—will indeed open an avenue to greater opposition to the machinations of the 1%. A lot of us love to hate Republicans…but seem easily disposed to forgive non-Republicans.
I agree with you completely on that.
But there is more to the equation…and that is where we seem to part company. I truly fear the other NEGATIVE things that will accrue to our society if someone like Gingrich, Santorum, or Paul takes the Oval Office. I respectfully suggest that the crap they will carry in with them will far out-weighs the benefits of any “greater opposition” that will build. With Romney, I think the same consideration applies, even if I do think it will be of slighter less impact.
Be that as it may, I understand your point here.
In your response in my thread, by the way, you also noted the irony of you expecting an Obama victory in November, while I am thinking he will be defeated. On that, as I said there, I hope you are correct and that I am wrong.
You are absolutely right, Libby. Voting for this rabid supporter of the military/industrial/corporatist complex would be a permanent stain on your conscience. Do not permit yourself to be deterred by any of the comments above. You stay home and urge your many fans to do likewise.
What's the old saying? "If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything." That about sums up O-man, the anti-MLK. He thinks the American public wants war and greed as a way of life so he caters to that. Funny part is he thinks that makes him responsible!
The current election is a rather amusing illusion of a choice. Choose your disaster.
Obama has been using the latest conquests as an enormous propaganda benefit as you indicated and this can't pay off in the long run although it may appeal to those that have been indoctrinated to be patriotic in a manner that involves global supremacy. This wouldn't be in the long term best interest of the country so true patriots that want what is best for all wouldn't support it if they understood.
Also as Barry indicated the workers should have their rights protected but not with a union bureaucracy controlled by well paid bureaucrats with their own best interest interfering with the best interest of the union; not that I agree with the Republicans who are always saying this since their solution is to eliminate unions and worker protection.
The accountability of union leaders needs to come from the union members not the business opposition.
Also as Barry indicated the workers should have their rights protected but not with a union bureaucracy controlled by well paid bureaucrats with their own best interest interfering with the best interest of the union; not that I agree with the Republicans who are always saying this since their solution is to eliminate unions and worker protection.
The accountability of union leaders needs to come from the union members not the business opposition.
That did grab my attention during the speech more than once. He did not only threaten the whole world, but he had the attitude to match in his delivery; he sounded more gangsta than smug. All this will help him in the coming elections, or at least that is the plan.
The big money always wins because it tells everyone what to do. R
The big money always wins because it tells everyone what to do. R
The blind worship of the military and militarism has now become the official religion of the USA. Maybe the simplicity of depending on brute force appeals to some. The grandiosity of American military ambition is....mind-boggling. It goes almost completely unquestioned in the MSM. The press seems more craven and docule every day.
markinjapan, how are you doing? appreciate your appearance! "professional liberal"? I didn't think the professional liberals were doing their jobs either, like Maddow or Larry O'D, etc. They know which side their GE bread is buttered on, after all. I guess I need to look into more deeply the vocab re liberalism or anti-liberalism. :)
Judy M., I think we what we've got here is a military fascism. We gotta use the closing window of freedom of speech to say what we can before it gets shut. So many have been so enthralled to media and Obama-spin that it has taken them a while to put in place the NDAA looming punishment for those telling truth to power and hoping fellow citizens can fathom what that truth actually is.
Jan, how brilliant is the arsenic and peanut butter sandwich metaphor!!!! I will think of it often. The ratio of arsenic to peanut butter in Obamaworld is ominously shifting. Less peanut butter required with the Orwellian momentum of automatic evil-choosing and the hypnotic craven media.
Frank, Obama doesn't need unconditional love right now from his supporters, he needs TOUGH LOVE, calling him out on his countless amoral POLICIES, Frank, not libbyliberal-speculated dark intentions, but REAL CONSTITUTION-GUTTING policies, and REAL GENOCIDAL WAR-MAKING policies, and CITIZEN WELFARE-DEMOLISHING domestic decision-making for the WELFARE OF HIS BFF CORPORATE cronies, like his bff, that super-exec from UBS he golfs and pals with. Amazing Obama still gets the blanket blessings of the so-called progressives for perpetrating the so-called "lesser evilism'. And overachieving Obama will push that to the edge of the envelope -- evil-mongering that is still covered by the blank-check of citizens still high on his hopium. One more ego-dysfunction from a damaged leader in America enabled by the willfully codependent deniers of reality, lost to Team Dem cronyism and their own ego challenges to have been so wrong about a media brand spun candidate over 3 years ago.
Gordon, you sound rather malicious. I will be support a decent candidate for president. Jill Stein of the Greens is looking good.
Harry, yes, the anti-MLK, but he will rhetorically spin otherwise, guaranteed. Some people have a gift for colossal mendacity. With the media military security industrial matrix with a stake in the lying prevailing for profitmaking, the horrifying Orwellian scenarios will keep continuing until or unless there is a citizen tipping point into collective will and consciousness.
Zachd, Obama stoking the post-9/11 "my country right or wrong" jingoism is disgusting and shows how not only amoral but lazy he is as a leader, and how "talk to the hand" he is about real humanitarianism and respect for peace. Learned helplessness of a citizenry traumatized for unemployment and low wages and loss of rights is a real challenge but also should be an incentive for workers to push back at their unions or to want to join unions for protection.
Thoth -- Obama wants to be a gangster, annointed as a saint. It gratifies a very damaged ego.
Donegal - It gave me chills, your words about the appealing "simplicity of brute force" among the authoritarian followers who want to trust the black and white, "my country right or wrong" mentality. We are so big and powerful nobody can mess with us over-identification with the one percenters running the world who could give a g*d-d*mn about the welfare of the lemmings enabling their evil.
Judy M., I think we what we've got here is a military fascism. We gotta use the closing window of freedom of speech to say what we can before it gets shut. So many have been so enthralled to media and Obama-spin that it has taken them a while to put in place the NDAA looming punishment for those telling truth to power and hoping fellow citizens can fathom what that truth actually is.
Jan, how brilliant is the arsenic and peanut butter sandwich metaphor!!!! I will think of it often. The ratio of arsenic to peanut butter in Obamaworld is ominously shifting. Less peanut butter required with the Orwellian momentum of automatic evil-choosing and the hypnotic craven media.
Frank, Obama doesn't need unconditional love right now from his supporters, he needs TOUGH LOVE, calling him out on his countless amoral POLICIES, Frank, not libbyliberal-speculated dark intentions, but REAL CONSTITUTION-GUTTING policies, and REAL GENOCIDAL WAR-MAKING policies, and CITIZEN WELFARE-DEMOLISHING domestic decision-making for the WELFARE OF HIS BFF CORPORATE cronies, like his bff, that super-exec from UBS he golfs and pals with. Amazing Obama still gets the blanket blessings of the so-called progressives for perpetrating the so-called "lesser evilism'. And overachieving Obama will push that to the edge of the envelope -- evil-mongering that is still covered by the blank-check of citizens still high on his hopium. One more ego-dysfunction from a damaged leader in America enabled by the willfully codependent deniers of reality, lost to Team Dem cronyism and their own ego challenges to have been so wrong about a media brand spun candidate over 3 years ago.
Gordon, you sound rather malicious. I will be support a decent candidate for president. Jill Stein of the Greens is looking good.
Harry, yes, the anti-MLK, but he will rhetorically spin otherwise, guaranteed. Some people have a gift for colossal mendacity. With the media military security industrial matrix with a stake in the lying prevailing for profitmaking, the horrifying Orwellian scenarios will keep continuing until or unless there is a citizen tipping point into collective will and consciousness.
Zachd, Obama stoking the post-9/11 "my country right or wrong" jingoism is disgusting and shows how not only amoral but lazy he is as a leader, and how "talk to the hand" he is about real humanitarianism and respect for peace. Learned helplessness of a citizenry traumatized for unemployment and low wages and loss of rights is a real challenge but also should be an incentive for workers to push back at their unions or to want to join unions for protection.
Thoth -- Obama wants to be a gangster, annointed as a saint. It gratifies a very damaged ego.
Donegal - It gave me chills, your words about the appealing "simplicity of brute force" among the authoritarian followers who want to trust the black and white, "my country right or wrong" mentality. We are so big and powerful nobody can mess with us over-identification with the one percenters running the world who could give a g*d-d*mn about the welfare of the lemmings enabling their evil.
"Jill Stein of the Greens is looking good."
Again, you're spot on. Let's all hear it for and rally 'round Jill Stein!
I assume she'll be listed on the ballot under "S."
Again, you're spot on. Let's all hear it for and rally 'round Jill Stein!
I assume she'll be listed on the ballot under "S."
Yes. "S" for SANE.
No comments:
Post a Comment