Department of Peace - What are the implications?

Many (most) in the media treat the concept in the same way they used to treat Jerry Brown's ideas in the 80's. This is convenient because it relieves them of the requirement to actually explore an idea.

So I think its up to us to explore the pros, cons (if there are any), and the implications of how this idea might play out over time, if it were to come into being.

The idea intrigues me because I have always felt that threats to our security exist today because of our corporatism/militarism. It is the reason why much of the world population would sacrifice much in order to prevent being assimilated into Borg, Inc.

A truly empowered Dept of Peace which might serve as an advocate of people against the evils of capitalism, such as globalization. It may not level the field but it will giive 99.9% of the world's population something they have never had - representation. The United Nations could/would have served that purpose, but it was emasculated by conservatives.

What have you thought about Dennis' Dept. of Peace?

PS - Since this is Dennis Day on the Daily Democrat, please limit your posts to constructive thoughts.

and my second is to say I don't really know much. You wanna give us a run-down of the proposal, & we'll go look at Kucinich's page, see what it's about, & let you know. I do dilike euphemisms a lot - I think Dept of Defense ought to be called Dept of War like it was originally - and that's how I usually refer to it. Anyway, be back later, after education on the topic.

Citizens across the United States are now uniting in a great cause to establish a Department of Peace, seeking nothing less than the transformation of our society, to make non-violence an organizing principle, to make war archaic through creating a paradigm shift in our culture for human development for economic and political justice and for violence control. Its work in violence control will be to support disarmament, treaties, peaceful coexistence and peaceful consensus building. Its focus on economic and political justice will examine and enhance resource distribution, human and economic rights and strengthen democratic values.




Domestically, the Department of Peace would address violence in the home, spousal abuse, child abuse, gangs, police-community relations conflicts and work with individuals and groups to achieve changes in attitudes that examine the mythologies of cherished world views, such as 'violence is inevitable' or 'war is inevitable'. Thus it will help with the discovery of new selves and new paths toward peaceful consensus.




The Department of Peace will also address human development and the unique concerns of women and children. It will envision and seek to implement plans for peace education, not simply as a course of study, but as a template for all pursuits of knowledge within formal educational settings.

in the, I believe, 1980's. It was featured on C-SPAN this past week. I think their scope is more international.

http://www.usip.org/aboutus/index.html

That's fine, as far as it goes.

But, unfortunately, it doesn't go far enough, and that's why this proposal is so needed.

That Institute is only for the study of "international" problems.

The Department of Peace is much deeper and broader, beginning with our own homes.

Kanary

Saw a spokesman talking about how we would be in Iraq for years.

Yeah, peace... right. Just like all those peacenicks that said that we had to stay in Vietnam, remember?

:eyes:

A different focus, so a different input.

Corrupted, indeed. With nothing to check it, except... some noodle-spined congresspeople.

Kanary

It's about "shifting the organizing princples" of our society; in other words, the evolution of a better America.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/departmentpeace.php

Just a snip:

Citizens across the United States are now uniting in a great cause to establish a Department of Peace, seeking nothing less than the transformation of our society, to make non-violence an organizing principle, to make war archaic through creating a paradigm shift in our culture for human development for economic and political justice and for violence control. Its work in violence control will be to support disarmament, treaties, peaceful coexistence and peaceful consensus building. Its focus on economic and political justice will examine and enhance resource distribution, human and economic rights and strengthen democratic values.

Domestically, the Department of Peace would address violence in the home, spousal abuse, child abuse, gangs, police-community relations conflicts and work with individuals and groups to achieve changes in attitudes that examine the mythologies of cherished world views, such as 'violence is inevitable' or 'war is inevitable'. Thus it will help with the discovery of new selves and new paths toward peaceful consensus.

The Department of Peace will also address human development and the unique concerns of women and children. It will envision and seek to implement plans for peace education, not simply as a course of study, but as a template for all pursuits of knowledge within formal educational settings.

Violence is not inevitable. War is not inevitable. Nonviolence and peace are inevitable. We can make of this world a gift of peace which will confirm the presence of universal spirit in our lives. We can send into the future the gift which will protect our children from fear, from harm, from destruction.

Such a department would listen to such NGOs as Refugees International, which monitor world situations. The department would find ways to make sure the starving were fed (hey, how about buying our excess grain and giving it to starving people instead of handing out farm subsidies?), the naked clothed, the homeless sheltered. They would be working hand in hand with the UN and local governments to make sure justice was meted out. This department would work with and encourage peace groups, such as the Israeli/Palestinian group at Geneva, to come up with viable peace plans for the world's trouble spots. The US would again take its place as the moral leader of the world. And it would be in our own self interest, because when a person is well fed, clothed, housed, has a job, and is treated fairly, they are not likely to decide they need to blow up something, including themselves.

:hi:

A Department of Peace would become the War Department.

A Department of Peace would work "for peace". The diplomatic approach to solving international problems would be of the highest priority. Actually, this is what the State Department should have been doing, but the Department of Peace would formalize the process more emphatically. Military force would never be used to intimidate anyone, that only increases confrontations. But we would maintain a force that no nation would dare confront. That force could be considerably smaller, however, since we would not be using it for world control by Empire anymore. Today, we have American military almost everywhere. That's the reason it takes so much money to maintain this level of force. This is outrageous in my opinion!

What is Orwellian is having a "Defense Department" that is a "war department for Empire".

Our War Department renamed itself the Defense Department in...1951? Something like that. Which is funny, because as far as I can remember it hasn't done much defense of the United States since then.

I think this is what I like about it the most.

As a former abused wife, I know first-hand that there aren't many viable alternatives for women caught in that situation. I like that Dennis is comprehensive in his proposal, and knows that any efforts towards peace have to start at home, and have to start with the young.

We've seen right here on DU what happens when basic ideals of peace are lost, and things deteriorate into verbal violence. It's hard to accomplish anything in that sort of atmosphere. Eventually, the "law" has to step in to change the direction.

If a Dept of Peace were to be established and taken seriously, it would change a lot of other important things, from the ground up.

Kanary

Whenever DK talks about the DOP he begins by talking about its efforts domestically. Promotion of non-violence must begin at home.
MLK and Ghandi would be proud. Naysayers have blinders.

me and is the most subtle, and powrful idea. The idea that the internalization of peaceful solutions is the starting point. All else follows.

Imagine. Actually looking at the real causes of violence in our families, in our schools, on our streets.

Fashioning real solutions from those real causes.

It's truly revolutionary.

Genius.

It will be a real shame, indeed, if we turn our backs on this opportunity, and some other country takes the idea and runs with it, and leaves us in the dust, looking dumb.

Kanary

Peace as a value deserves its department. For the survival of the U.S. it might even be necessary!

Because at least half of congress will laugh the idea out of the room.


Look, it's a great idea. Something I look forward to seeing in our country's future. But in the current cynical political climate, it will never fly.

first they laugh at you
then they try to stop you
then you win

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win."

He's done it before.

Folks, get ready -- he's about to do it again.

Seabiscuit and the owner, trainer, jockey, BUT he became a historical legend!!!

Do NOT ever forget this :D




EDIT: Apologies for the continual Seabiscuit referrals, BUT watched it on the way home from Seattle...I cried was excellent!!! Buying it for my folks for Christmas because they love horse racing! Might throw in a Kucinich sticker or something and hope they don't have a heart attack :+

and powerful. But Gandhi never said how much time passes between the laughter and you winning. Did Gandhi ever win? Look at India and Pakistan. Where's the peace?

It always looks goot written down.

Is India still ruled by Great Britain? :eyes:

It's important to remember that India and Pakistan could have had peace had it not been for the British. It was they who decided to support a separate state and promoted their guy Jinnah. Had Gandhi's movement been allowed to unfold, who knows what the world would look like.

BTW, if you want to discover the source of most or all of the world's strife, look no further than the imperialist adventures of the European.

Those who merely laugh are not the problem. It would probably incite the religious right to a riot, at least initially.

Last night, flipping channels, I landed on that show where Pat Robertson or his son and this woman with poufy, light reddish-brown hair discuss the news and pray - The 700 Club, I think. The news dude was interviewing Ryan Dobson, who I assume is the son of Dr. James "Focus on the Family" Dobson because he mentioned his dad going on programs. He's written a book called Be Intolerant, the premise of which is you shouldn't accept things you don't believe in. I sat there and marveled at him smiling and claiming to love Jesus and care about people while preaching a basic message of hate. Deeply, profoundly scary.

These people will never get on board with the Department of Peace because they simply don't agree, no matter what they say, that everyone should live together in harmony. Their harmony involves oppressing, excluding, and denying the existence of those whose lifestyles offend them.

Is it possible to staff the Department of Peace in a way that the rightsters will feel their beliefs are respected and at least some of their goals are being pursued, while still getting anything done? I don't think so. But I'd sure like to try, and I'd like to hear more about how the Department of Peace would be staffed and how it would work.

is their love of money.

but their followers - the people who send money - are about the ideology. They believe they're being persecuted for their Christianity. They want abortions and homosexuals to go away and the people who support them to shut up. They enjoy hearing about the killing of "terrorists" and don't care if the bombs that get dropped on the terrorists kill "civilians." They don't think of those civilians as being similar to them in any way. They believe the way to make problems like domestic abuse and addictions go away is to accept Jesus and follow their family model.

Are you saying there's some financial incentive for them to support the Department of Peace, or just making a wry observation?

initiative. They are sold an ideology. And therein lies the tragedy. They pay for ideology. They are misled by those who profit from selling their myths.

The way to win friends and influence people -- denigrating their beliefs.

and those of us who recognize that everyone has to live together, regardless of our differences, would know it.

I shouldn't be making sweeping generalizations about the beliefs of a large group of people or calling out the support of killing and bombing as an identifying feature of this group. That was thoughtless.

On edit: Whoops! This a reply to #28, not #27.

the hard core "intolerance is good" people are a small minority. They couldn't riot, they can only fume.

like, say, neo-Nazi skinheads, they wouldn't be all over the TV. There are lots of people who agree with them and are just less vocal about it. Are they a minority? Maybe - just don't try to convince them of that. And I didn't mean riot literally.

We need a Department of Peace now more than ever and not in 2004 NOW, TODAY, THIS YEAR!

Reminds me of couples wanting babies and trying to plan them for the most appropriate time when it will least cut into their careers, educations, $$$$, etc. Usually babies have a way of showing up when THEY are ready :+

Why would this be any different?

To me?

Reducing family violence is important.

Reducing gang violence is important.

Reducing bullying is important.

Reducing our war budget is important.

From NOW with Bill Moyers

"On July 31, 2003, Reuters led its business news coverage with the headline "Defense Spending Driving U.S. Economy." In January 1961 President Dwight D. Eisenhower issued a warning about this symbiotic relationship between government defense spending and the economy in his farewell address to the nation. Indeed, Department of Defense and related defense spending accounts for the majority of federal spending in nearly every state. And the U.S. accounts for 43 percent of world military spending. (...)

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. --President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation

Eisenhower's words of warning undoubtedly hold extra weight, coming from an ex-General who had witnessed World War II defense spending restore a depression economy, and a president who presided over crucial years of the Cold War.

The current U.S. defense budget one of the largest in American history. The defense budget has not reached the high percentage of discretionary spending that it held during the Reagan administration. (Discretionary spending is the the portion of the federal budget that Congress can disperse — in 1982 defense spending accounted for 61.1 percent of the total discretionary budget.) However, the 2003 and 2004 budget numbers do not include the costs of the war in Iraq or peacekeeping and reconstruction efforts. Current Pentagon estimates run to $3.9 billion a month to keep nearly 150,000 American troops in Iraq. White House budget director Joshua B. Bolten puts the total reconstruction costs for 2003 at about $7.3 billion."


Another good source can be found here.

The gist?

If we don't implement peace now, we will see the end of the New Deal programs enacted by FDR, which have provided needed support for some of the most vulnerable Americans over the past five plus decades.

We're lucky. We never had to live life without that social safety net. If people keep falling for the hype shoveled at us by the GOP and other accomplices of the MIC, we will.

I've always felt that if we could take care of our kids and our families then the worlds problems would disappear.

Like that book said "Everything I Ever Needed to Know I learned in Kindergarten" (or something like that)

That's the plan behind all the spending and deficits. It will wreck the economy, and then the left and center will finally be hit hard, and take it out on the people below. A very good way to finish fracturing the split between the classes.

Charming, eh?

So, while I'm alone with this, and will be split off and die alone from the cuts, eventually it's gonna get the rest of ya. Might as well start battling it now, eh?

Kanary

I don't really see the need for the stuff in the first paragraph of the proposal put here; that seems like the function of the State Department, so why create more bureaucracy? It would be a more efficient system if these functions were added to the existing State Department.

I do like the domestic aspect, though, and Kucinich would do well to highlight this part of his proposal since before I walked into this thread, I had no idea that there was a domestic side to the Department of the Peace. Perhaps even if this didn't become a full-fledged Department, it could be a cabinet-level agency like the EPA. (Although still I wonder, are these also functions of the HHS?)

The reason this is a great idea is that it fixes what is really the problem in the strucrure of government...there are too many agencies who provide a host of services. The lack of proper planning and coordination is what dooms the current system. What the Department of Peace could do is serve in a capacity similar to that of the Dept of Homeland Security.

those who think otherwise haven't been listening

prolly end up a SUPER NATION.

We would be able to fund ideas for Peace.

Of course the Neo cons and Mil Ind ComPlx guys would fight tooth and nail. What they don realize is that they too will end up much richer.

The DOW would soon top 20 000 and higher.

The stress level would diminish

The poverty level would diminish

Less abuse, less crime, less divorce, less ugliness, and

LESS TERRORISM, less fat, less pollution, less waste.

Come, help me shut up.

"The stress level would diminish

The poverty level would diminish

Less abuse, less crime, less divorce, less ugliness, and

LESS TERRORISM, less fat, less pollution, less waste.

Come, help me shut up."

Nope, I don't shut up people who are on a roll!!

This is such agony for those of us who can share this vision, and know it's a "CAN DO", and see all the foot draggging and naysaying... We *CAN* live this way, really we can! We just have to decide this is what we want, and that we will put our effort into it.

Shut up?

Naw. I nominate you for cheerleader for the Dept of Peace!! ^_^

Kanary

You are so right and we would all benefit all over the planet and the planet could eventually become more healthy. The neo cons will never buy into it because they do not want any of those things, all they want is power and they are such greedy little bastards.

Where is THAT money going to come from.

I know you don't like much of anything that is proposed, but.... try reading it and giving it a fair hearing. You might actually be surprised.

Kanary

No matter how much you might wish to whack the defense budget, it's not going away and it's pretty damn huge.

Parity with that would result in a tax increase to ensure GOP elections till 2100.

I don't see anywhere about how we would pay for it.

But, I guess you're more content with how things are now....?

I followed the link...

And no, I'm not happy with the way things are. Nor am I eager to endorse fantasy.

Please point me to anything in Kucinich's material that remotely suggests funding his proposed Dept. of Peace at parity with the Dept. of War.

"Parity" was one proposal in Opihimoimoi's list of attributes of a much better world. I happen to agree with him.

For you, however, to take that and start thundering about how Kucinich's proposal is arrant nonsense because we can't have funding parity is, well, arrant nonsense.

How would Kucinich fund the Dept. of Peace? For starters, he modestly proposes to cut war funding by a whole 15%. Now, you may believe that cutting 15% from the largest military budget in the history of mankind leaves the country in perilous danger. You are entitled to that opinion, but you are not entitled to demand that it be respected.

You are aware, are you not, that the Pentagon has experienced a little accounting glitch, to the tune of a trillion bucks, give or take a hundred billion? Peeling off a bit of that to fund a Dept. of Peace shouldn't be too destructive.

I'd be interested in knowing just what you mean when you say, "No matter how much you might wish to whack the defense budget, it's not going away and it's pretty damn huge." This appears to me to mean that you believe that there are simply two possibilities: The military budget funded as it is, or no military budget at all.

I would respectfully request that you point me to anyone on this thread, or to anything in Kucinich's material indicating a belief that the military budget is "going away," or should go away.

There's a vast difference between zero military spending and nearly $500 billion in military spending. It really shouldn't be all that hard to understand that landing somewhere along that continuum is possible.

Come, we abandon binary thinking, get plate lunch and talk about all the possibilities. (With apologies to Opihimoimoi.)

Is it Ho'opono or Ho'apa that is the Hawaiian traditional sit down straighten it out thing Opihi ?

I've been away from my ancient Hawaiian spirituality classes way too long :cry:

Whadda I know.... come, we hula... ^_^

Did you see the photo of DK in a lei? !!

Malama pono, tlcandie!

Kanary

My best friend in Seattle has a hula family and performs quite often... she's very good!

Aye Ho'oponopono... !! I almost typed that even :+


EDIT: Absolutely LOVE watching the Merry Monarch festival!! Gives me goose flesh!!! The power of the chants are out of this world.. my Ike delights!!

And we'll hula our brains out. :)

When you fall on the floor breathless, we'll put on one of my MM tapes. Chicken skin, indeedy...

You can't fight when you hula...

Hmmm, maybe you can come here when Makaha Sons perform here... :)

sigh...

Kanary

If it was near my birthday I would be ecstatic!! February.... :O Holds breath...

We just request Moon move the performance a bit.... I think they are scheduled to be here in April. They were here the first part of Oct, and were *fantastic*!

Can you pretend next year, just for this one year, that your birthday is in April??

Also, there might *possibly* be a hula workshop with it.... be still my heart....

Kanary.. with fingers crossed....

be better!!!

I can celebrate my son's birthday there! Yay!! PM me or I will you with my e-mail addy...we do this thing!

Colorado seasons:

Almost winter

Winter

Still winter

Road construction....

One PM message coming up!

Kanary, now waaay too excited to get to sleep...

didn't all the peaceful people go to Denver? hmmmmm

But, I'd sure be very pleased if Denver were suddenly populated by peaceful people.

Would make it nicer to get up in the morning. :)

Did you get the chance to read over Dennis' proposal?

I sure hoped we'd hear an answer to our question!

Kanary

Kucinich 2004!

You should read it. Good Book. Movie was good too.

No wonder I wasn't familiar with it. :)

This was such a good discussion, it has made me realize how much of a wasteland most of the site is. I'm probably not going to be around as much, as it is really dragging me down. Wish there was some way to get a notice if a good topic comes around.... sigh....

Kanary

Humanity gets almost wiped out by killer virus and peace wins the day.

It's one of the few King books I've read.

A moral to them, sort of.

I wonder if anyone saw Paul Simon's funeral service today on C-Span. I know there are a lot of people who admired Paul and there were some very touching eulogies delivered about him... some really moving anecdotes and a lot of funny ones.

Ted Kennedy was a close friend of Paul's and I thought his was one of the best. This thread reminds me of something he said - he was quoting his brother from a speech he had made in South Africa in 1966.

"Few are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change."
-- Robert F. Kennedy

boy, is that as true today as ever.

And I was struck by how that quote seemed to really identify what we need right now from liberals. Not mollycoddling of those that would resist change, but the courage of character necessary in order to lead Americans toward a better, more responsible future.

We are supposed to be a Christian nation. How hard could it be to appeal to those values which so many only give lip service to?

a reconciliation gathering to heal/bond/love

Come, we make the fires, cook the food, pound the poi, make smoked meat and fish.

Now it is exactly right!! :loveya: I miss the pulled pork with cabbage and jelled coconut milk for dessert OR the Portugese donuts.. ahhh man, I'm upset that I've lost so much knowledge that I had while in Seattle... :cry:

Come, we heat up the hibachi, teri chicken, pipikaula, ribs, cold beer.

I think most people need to stop and think about this idea.

Do they want a Department of Peace?

Which means: Do you really want the GOAL to be peace?

I think most people, right now, would say no.

I think most in America do not want peace. I think most in Israel do not want peace.

I think most are filled with hatred and fear and want to kill those who might want to kill us.

This is an important realization to have, because I think most people simply haven't realized this yet.

This is why the very thought of a Department of Peace is so important.

The nation needs to brood on this.

Why don't we want peace?

There's probably no more important question in the world right now.

This is the same philosophical perspective as saying, on a personal level, why people fear success. I believe people fear peace and success because they do not conceptualize life on higher order. They have the ability but it is not allowed to develop.

We need to feel positive enough about ourselves as a nation and as a people to begin to change the internal dialogue. Instead of competition, cooperation. That would be the beginning. Competition is good in many ways but not when relating to others, especially when the balance is so heavy on one side. Once we can get out of this nasty "with us or against us" mode we can begin. Once we begin the transition at home we can extend it. Man, nobody (average Americans) seems to understand how important this is. Our sense of community has been taken from us. How is it possible to ever get that back without a significant change in our thought processes?

in tact :silly:


EDIT: is = is NOT

they are just scared to death. I agree they are filled with hatred and fear, so much they are paralised. They think they can not have peace. They think they do not deserve it. It's just a problem of perception.
Yes, we need to ask ourselves:
Do we want peace?
Why don't we want peace?
Wait a minute, how do I know I don't want peace?
Who is this "I", that doesn't want peace? Where is it?
Anybody ever found it?
Don't look outside!

says that it is hard for people to imagine something that they have no history or picture to visualize. In essence, this is new and dramatically different from anything else we've ever suggested other than some John Lennon types.

We've got to paint a picture for them of IMAGINE...

HOW do we go about doing that so they can visualize it, so it catches on and becomes reality?

I think that is OUR biggest hurdle. Mere words will not do it. We should have children and all people painting banners and things for their cars, etc that will bring various pieces of the peace paradigm into reality.

Suggestions?

at least once before, by Mahatma Gandhi. It CAN work. The problem is the very small minority that has a vested interest in having that vision fail. Oh, and they have really big guns.

this is the key to the future/

and keep it continually burning with a prayer that is common to all of us and each time we pass it or stand over it or think of it visualize peace...

I have done the candle thing many times and it is awesome to experience! :D

Jumps up and down! :D

I'm thinking... it's fear of losing... fear of being overpowered... It sounds too much like passivity...

All one has to do is think of Dennis with Ted Koppel, and *know* that peace doesn't mean rolling over and losing oneself.

Dennis knows Peace. Dennis also knows Justice.

We need Dennis to *show* us that vision.... we know it's there.

Kanary

Most peeps think of peace as total submission. Dennis is FAR from that! It's the inner peace that he's talking about helping people find...the CONNECTEDNESS!!!!

with a positive peaceful effect instead of pre-emptive illegal wars and empire of corporate interests from the RW fascist criminals and traitors of the neo-conservative persuasion in this administration.

What we have sought as a species IMHO. Peace. Work for peace locally think globally and not in terms of conquest or markets and slavery.

Peace from my house to your house.
Bob

:hi:

A Department of Peace is unnecessary, and I believe counter-productive. The best way to promote peace is to have an entire Administration dedicated to the idea, not one single Department.

I thought that was the original intent of the State Department, since that is where our diplomacy comes from. And better representation at the UN would be nice. Not the Hawks we have there now.

It appears the Master Pubs have outwitted themselves without realizing it. They have set in motion a systematic apparatus to brain wash us into Sheep.

We never see the Gov't telling us to vote with care, with smarts, with research. No, we are told to vote and thats it. And this is what happened. Newt and his GOPAC, Pat Robinson and his 700 Club, his Christian Coalition, Rush and his Dittoheads, etc, etc they collectively have been successful in building the Pug Party to the point of impact/

This is not good considering their agenda is not based on the Common Good but rather for the 1 percenters and the Mil Ind Complx. Now that they have been so successful, be careful for what you wish for? they are in control.

Normally this would just run its course as so many other despotic/arrogant/fanatical gov'ts of yesteryear.

In this case its different.

The Planet is nearing its capacity in terms of energy, nutrient base, and space. Our population on thios Planet is way over the top.
Our resources are dwindling at an alarming rate. We will soon face energy problems as never seen before. Water is getting more scarce and so is top soil to grow our foods. and the list is long.

The Point is: We have only a small window of time to come to grips and find viable solutions.Instead we go about in denial in search of self gratification.

Until we come to our senses and embrace Reality, Sanity who are saying.............get a life, plan and implement ideas/concepts that will further the notion of a sustainable EARTH. Either we address a long term survival or we go extinct. Its that simple baby.

Come, we go plan how to dig wells for water, ours went dry.

keep talking

We can stand around, smirking with the best of the smirkers, saying nope, nope, nope to every proposal and keep noping until the clock runs out. We can wait until we are pushed to it by desperation.

Or, we can dig in and *MAKE* it work, and find good leadership to steer us.

What a decision. hmmm..

Kanary

I was beating up on the people that Bush has sent there. But I don't think a DoP will accomplish what you wish and I wish to accomplish.

We need better diplomats to attain peace. Not a new cabinet department. It's the equivalent of the Homeland Security Department when our DoD should be our HS Department. By that I mean our military should only be defending our borders and not putting bases up around the world.

Oh, BTW, Please don't be quiet. We need your voice.
I appreciate your voice.

..and diplomacy!

However, as I've been saying, the Department of Peace goes much further and much deeper. Diplomats don't speak to our violence issues right here inside our own borders. The Department of Peace *will*. I doubt you would argue that we citizens actually face more threat from within than without?

Also, in generations to come, as the Department of Peace affects peacemaking on an individual and family and community level, the population as a whole will have a deeper understanding of international peace, and less of an inclination to treat international issues as a football game. It's "holistic", if you will.

A good point you bring up, however, is that I'm now thinking this Department of Peace should be non-political... it shouldn't be vulnerable to the shifting winds of political thought for at least 20 years, in order to give it a chance to actually work. That's a new thought, and I need to consider that for a while.

Besides, now my head hurts. :+

Thanks for the input, camero!

Kanary

The dept would have to be independent of contemperanious political pressures

But I think a good idea would be to have peace reps in the major cabinet depts like H&HS, State, Education, and the DoD even.

Sort of as a subcabinet position. Plus it gets hidden from the politics since it's being done behind the scenes. Maybe in 20 yrs, we can have one. They would still sit in on WH meeetings and have input.

And we can institute the concept of peace throughout the govt.

OK, I admit this may sound really strange, but pleeez, try to hang in there with me on this, 'K?

In the past, I've done a fair amount of work on the issue of Invasive Weeds. It's a tough issue that almost nobody wants to deal with, even though it's eating up much of our natural lands. It's just not as "sexy" as animals, etc.

So, each agency would have it's "weed agent", whose task it was to study the weeds in the lands that agency was responsible for, and to plot a course of action, etc. Sounds fine, yeah?

In actuality, what happened was that these weed agents were isolated within their own agencies, and had no power and not much in the way of resources to actually be effective. Not only was not much getting done, but the morale of the agents was down in the basement. When a state organization was organized to bring all the various agents together to support each other and brainstorm effective methods, things changed immensely, and rapidly.

Yes, weeds are peace, but the same sort of process holds. It becomes much more important and effective when it has it's own department, power base. Peace *HAS* to become important enough to us as a society, and our desire for peace on a daily level seen as necessary to our own survival, so that we can *FINALLY* begin to take coordinated action, instead of ineffective piecemeal steps that affect very little in practical terms.

With all our efforts, child abuse has not lessened. Abused wives being murdered hasn't lessened. Rape and muggings and car jackings haven't lessened. Gangs are not suffering from attrition.

Need I go on? What we're doing isn't working. It's time... make that *beyond* time... to do something different. Something big enough to actually stand a chance of affecting change.

Now, back to pulling weeds... :-)

Kanary, wishing there was a peace sign emoticon... ^_^

Yeah, it would do good as it's own department. And they probably would get relegated to the basement in the other depts. and in funding.

My fear is another admin would come along and repeal or defund the department.

It could put effective messages of non-violence on the airwaves as a media campaign. That would be a good thing.

And, I don't even have any sales skills. :)

I'm enjoying this discussion, because I'm feeling much more upbeat just being able to talk about some good possibilities for a change, instead of all the awful reality going on. There really is hope, if we can step out a bit into the realm of dreams, and think about how it can be accomplished. I guess I'm missing the Kennedy-type inspiration right now.

I share your fear about it being sabotaged by succeeding administrations. I wish Dennis were here to talk about that. I'm wiling to bet he has thought of that, and has some ideas on that. Where's Dennis when we need him... :)

I think there'd be a lot more going on than non-violence messages on the airwaves. I doubt that would even affect D.U.ers. :)

Kanary

to come and enlighten us on his visioin. If he's on the ball he would have someone on his staff take the opportunity to do so.

Excellent, burythehatchet!

I'm waiting with worm on tongue (baited breath, ala Robin Williams). Wouldn't that be fine to have an answer right here? Big enough audience, too.

Y'know, you remind me that I haven't read his proposal in a while... Whaddy say we read it bit by bit, and maybe have some other, equally deep questions?

Sure beats the heck outta pondering my upcoming surgery.... :)

Thanks for running with the ball!

Kanary, who sometimes runs with scissors...

Just the implementation. Yeah, there would be alot more going on but TV does affect most subliminally. Not us, though.

You said that very well... and made it clear how important it is to do something different, and how critical the need is now.

Now, according to everyone else, I'm a stoooopid idealist and should just go pull my head out. It helps to know that at least 8One* person thinks I have something of value to say.

Can you tell I'm ready to throw in the towel on everything?

Thanks for your kind words.

Kanary

I give props to Kucinich for promoting the idea but the originators of the concept of a Dept of Peace is The Natural Law Party http://www.natural-law.org/

But the original idea goes to Washington, George Washington, kudos the natural law party though too.

You kids are just too quick for us oldsters. ~~silly grin~~

Kanary

Welcome to D.U.!!

:hi: :hi: :hi:

:toast:

Kanary

Here's why - today I've arrived at the conclusion, based upon the comments some of you have made, that this department is essentially going to function as the voice and advocate of commen people. Because if you follow the logic that war is waged by people of means in order to protect their wealth, then it follows that the people dying in war are those without the protection that wealth provides. So why in the world would those with the guns empower those without the guns? I don't know if I'm conveying my meaning appropriately, but it just seems that its too much to hope for.

The Department of Peace is *not*, repeat *NOT* solely about war.

It is peacemaking at it's most basic level.

It entails communication skills, negotiating skills, conflict resolution skills.

How differently would people think, let alone behave, if the majority of the population were able to operate from that level?

This isn't just a shift in military function... this is a revolution of how a culture operates.

We have to think bigger than we've been thinking about this.

Kanary

So you envision short term objectives as not very bold. Rather they would be subtle and pervasive. The ideas you mention, communication skills, negotiating skills, conflict resolution skills, really are the foundation for peace. And the great thing is that the cost of these programs is laughable when you compare it to any defense system

I certainly don't have all the answers, burythehatchet, but I'm glad that we were able to discuss it, and broaden the concept a bit. It's much deeper, and therefore much more revolutionary.

You make a good point about the cost being laughable. A cheap investment in a healthier society. Something's gotta be wrong with that. :)

I'm assuming you saw the site with the email from Norway, and what they can afford to do because they aren't so invested in huge defense costs? Food for thought, indeed.

Kanary

We already have a clear example of what a Department of Peace would have to face in the current Administration. Look at the battles between the State Department and the Department of Defense. The people in the Department of Defense have marginalized those in the State Department, basically rendering them ineffective in directing foreign policy. That is why I feel that the best way to promote peace is to have the combined effort of advocates in the entire cabinet working towards that goal.

We need Masters Programs and Ph D Programs in Peace, Peace Building, Sustainable Peace, and how to Implement and Prevail.

We need an Ad Campaign,

We need Model Cities

Model Nations, Model Systems

We need to get off the Dime and Plow ahead. Time is awasting.

I'm ready.

Where do I sign up? :)

In addition.... family counselors trained in peacemaking, clergy trained in peacemaking, Landlord/Tenant organiations trained in peacemaking, labor trained in peacemaking, teachers trained in peacemaking...

Am I being redundant yet?

Peace... 'tis the season...

Kanary

would be posting to this thread.

With that said, we move on to the subject of collective philosophies. From my small perch, our society in the American Culture is so confused, so flummoxed, by the past 25 years of brain washing from the PsyOps and 4000+ years of religion, we don't know what we, as a people, want.

Selfishness has beem ingrained into our psyche to the point of Meism being not only accepted but the rule. Very few think of the Village.
IE Hillarys book got savaged big time for suggesting it takes a Village to raise a child. In my book, more Dems think VILLAGE than Pubs thats fer sure.

With that in mind, I ask, how does one propose this Dept of Peace and hope to escape the laughter, the derision, the naysayers? The only way for this concept/notion to take root is Success on a scale that warrants attention. If anything garners attention its Success.
Suppose someone thinks of a Plan and its so simple people will ask, Damn, why didn't we think of this before..? Like Aunty would ask, "What took you so long?" and it works to the point of attracting the right attention... Like Mike Moore sez, its that one small step, that one move at the right time/

In this case, the negativity, the cynicism, the apprehension, must be overcome. But if people can be fooled by the Pubs with Bullshit, think of what people will "Believe" with concrete proof, with models that work?

I suspect people of the World are very hungry for Peace and the time has come. I strongely urge we get together to form something incipient towards the goal of Fun and Laughter in the Sun. Perhaps a Party, a Luau for the Goal of Peace in Hawaii. Honolulu means "The Gathering Place" a name most appropriate. At this Luau, we have guest speakers on the subject and to find ways to implement. We may even be able to entice a few Dems to come.

Come, we fight for FUN in the SUN. We fight for Peace, it ain't gonna be easy.

kick for the Sunday morning first shift

http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Concourse/5993/

But hey, peace is not a growth industry. Who's gonna make the profit? And you know the rules: No profit, no media. No media, no existence.

There's a ton of people who actually are out there doing things to create peace. People really doing the kinds of things Kucinich talks about--dispute resolution, nonviolence training. But, gosh! They just don't have the pizzazz that {fill in today's celebrity criminal} has.

Keep kickin' Mr. Opihimoimoi.

far. not enough hotels.

Komo oleo Kanaka O Kaaina

Come, we talk.

Have you been to the volunteer board? You might consider posting this idea there. I wonder how quickly a bunch of people could be brought together. The Steps for Peace started out as an idea floated on that board.

It's more than worth a try.

And yes, you'd think what with this being the time of year when everyone softens toward their fellow human beings that this would get a bit more attention. It's the season of hope, joy, peace, love, brotherhood, kindness, and forgiveness.

Maybe that's part of the reason why so many people get depressed at this time of year. It's so far removed from reality, but obviously so attainable (very many of us can get pretty close for a few days, can't we?)

http://www.hagelin.org/news/08_10_2001.html

<snip>
And in terms of specifics, we can educate our children in principles of human relations, how they can get along without having to resort to aggression, how to deal with their feelings. So the Department of Peace would have an education component that would take the message through the U.S. Department of Education and make it available to 50 states. That would have the whole curricula for peace, with many objectives at every grade level so that we would teach peace instead of war.
<snip>

<snip>
Yes, the budget would be paid with 1%. The formula would be 1% of whatever the Department of Defense was spending. In this case, the Department of Defense spends $300 billion a year, so we would want to see at least $3 billion appropriated for a Department of Peace. In that way we enable our country to start to develop alternatives to military action as a means of resolving differences.
<snip>

<snip>
The creation of a government department, from its inception, ought to be about saving money. A Department of Peace would bring a new measure of economy to government because through working to eliminate war, we eliminate the greatest waste invention in the world--the waste of lives, the waste of natural and economic treasure. But, beyond that, if you look at the domestic applications, think of the cost of racial violence. Think of the cost of gang violence. Think of the cost of crimes involving drugs in our society. Think of the tremendous toll which domestic violence takes. And some could say, "Well, this is just inevitable." No, it's not. We have the ability to address this and to change our culture. It's a long haul, but the thought in which we are all united has the ability to create a moment of qualitative transformation once we get enough people interested. And that can be of great value to the society. It can save not only money and lives but it can put America on a new path.
<snip>

<snip>
People are aware, all over the world, that we need to do better in the way that we address human relations. And so I'm gratified by seeing the response to this idea, which isn't original because there are thinkers throughout time who have looked to ways of trying to quicken this evolutionary impulse and to improve human potential. It's just our job. We who are here now, it's our job. It's our turn to carry that message forward.
<snip>

The emphasis I would suggest is to address Peace in a way that is exciting, passionate, and believeable/pragmatic.

In addition, Peace should be dissected into differing levwels and the various ways to implement.

It is, in reality, the creation of new systems which will be neccessary to reduce the chances of a return to the old ways of war. These systems should be worked out very carefully. and obviously, in such a way the people who hold power now, are not shoved aside in a brutal fashion.

It is a very touchy road we thread on here. Patience and pace I think will be well advised.

Come, we make shave ice with ice cream popular/

Opihi, maybe you know it as Hawaiian better than us. I remember the stories that Puni told me of families long ago before the white man came to the islands...it was awesome!

The togetherness, connectedness. Heck, the Native Americans as well know more than we do about peace.

But you are right it needs to be simple. Something we can start where we are around our neighborhoods, schools, grocery stores, etc. Something like random acts of kindness thing that is revolutionary that is so small, but just blossoms with critical mass that goes along with Dennis' idea of the DoP....


Hmmm thinking .. :think:

The village thing is on its way out. It was a good time. lasted for 50 000 years but since the advent of large cities, its all gone impersonal. now a days, you hardly know your neighbors beyond the 3rd house.

But if we look, there are new developments addressing this. Small complexes that stress villagesque atmospheres are slowly coming into vogue. It is a good way of life.

But to the core goal of Peace, its not easy, perhaps more than even DK can chew. That is to say of we go about it the normal way.

However, if the desire is that strong, and luck is with us, we may see something blossom from the smallest start. It will take brains and tenacity. It will take a blueprint with models for all to see/chew/discuss/and critique.

Come, we go get ink.

I have made it a point to know MANY around me...6 I believe so far! I take them fresh oranges, tangeloes and a small Poinsettia plant every Christmas along with some fresly baked homemade Banana Nut and Zucchini breads and a Christmas card!!!

I love my neighbors!!

Someday, those people will be there for you.

I'm not a fan of the concept of a Dept. of Peace, but where I would start is develop a Peace College (think War College where commanders are trained for warfare) in which Peace tactics are taught. That provides a foundation to work from.

our very own terrorist training camp. The thought of a Mediator Training Camp made me laugh - people in fatigues breaking up fights and settling disputes.

:)

minutes of meditation

:hi:

Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah
Peace, bruddah

its not hard to do

for those of us who operate at about the 3rd grade level... wheeeha, we play now...

Kanary

Joking mostly, but then again kinda not! :D LOTS of playing makes learning faster!! Too bad they did away with that after kindergarten!

it's not hard to do because it already is.

http://www.crazyjeff.net/peacequotes.html

:kick:

Komo mai ho'oponopono

Come, we make Peace

http://www.hagelin.org/news/08_10_2001.html

<snip>
Well, that's what this legislation would seek to do. It would seek to create a peace academy which would be the counterpart of a military academy. It would seek to support existing programs in universities and support the creation of new programs to teach peace and to help equip teachers of peace. A new idea for a University of Peace is well taken, because we need to create an architecture for higher education in peace studies. Such programs exist in many different ways in many universities around the world, but to create a single university as a statement of the highest aspirations for such programs would, I think, be very meaningful for our world. And I think we'll probably see it happen someday.

I think we're finding all over the world this hunger people have for connectedness. Those of us who view the world in a holistic way, seeing it as an unbroken whole, understand that there is an essential interconnectedness which we all have. And when people awaken to the pulsation for peace which is out there, when they hear of programs that work to further it, they can get very excited about it. Which is why, interestingly enough, this proposal has already gained attention in countries all around the world. It's astonishing how quickly an idea starts to move, and that's why a university of peace would be a prelude to a world of peace. It's interesting though, I've talked to people who just look at this and go, "Oh, God, another pie in the sky idea." You have to believe in a benevolent nature. We have to believe that this world can be a better place. We have to believe that our highest aspirations can be achieved. And so, I believe that the power of an idea whose time has come is the sphere that surrounds the Department of Peace.
<snip>

implementation, and the sowing of the seeds of Peace. So easy but so hard.

There's that "click"! The neocons capitalize (pun intended) on the conserves belief that people are rotten at the core. *THAT'S* our big difference. We have to hold on to our core belief that people are mostly good, unless corrupted.

And that hunger for connectedness! Oh yes! The frustration of that need brings about the addictions... including the incessant shopping to avoid that sense of aloneness.

By learning how to listen... how to *really* hear the other, connectedness is created, and peace begins.

Thanks so much for the quotes.... very satisfying...

Kanary

don't mean this to be a flame or anything, but wasn't there a Department of Peace in the book 1984?

:+

OMG you remind me of my husband! He LOVES Mr. Hanky!

Mr. Hankey owns!

:+

Of course, I will defer to all Star Trek geeks for political guidance.

Thank you.

So much.

Come, we eat chicken adobo.

My stooooooooooopid browser is having problems loading the whole page.

Would it be possible to start a second page?

Don't wanna miss anything!

Kanary

don't wanna get ego/preachy on ya

Aloha for now

Malamalama O Ke Kai

It is 4:30am here OMG!! I gotta hit the sack! Gotta pack my hubby off on the aeroplane tomorrow for Pennsylvania :O


:loveya:

Opihi, Kanary PM whenever you want! I'm so excited hope I can sleep! :wow:

and I"m wide awake. It's like mid-afternoon for me now.

I should be a vampire...

:kick:

It don't look too good, the Neocons are seen whooping it up .

Come, we go help the Iraqis build a fire for cooking kalua pig.

I tend to believe that these symbolic victories, the turkey, the carrier landing, are capable of giving a short term boost. The fundamental issues are not going away though. Two huge attacks just today, in fact.

Look for a big week of saturation coverage, then we move on seeking the next source of gratification.

We need the Peace now more than ever. This Bush is making killing/war popular, damn

Come, we go find keawe wood for the imu

"Dept of Surrender", and will vote upon his preception. Sorry, but that is the real world - you know - the one of sound bites and ads. Most people don't have the time or inclination to go deeply into the nuances of political ideas and programs.

That's OK, tho... we'll keep all the violence... we've become used to it, right?

Good for the soul, it is.

Sorry, indeed.

I'm tired.

Kanary

all we saying is, there should be a balance in the spending.

After all , what is more IMPORTANT, WAR OR PEACE?

Yup We must prevail in War but then What happens if we Prevail in Peace?

We end up at the same place but with Peace, there was no killing, devestation, loss of Honor, and like shit.

In Peace, all are winners,

In War, all are losers.

See, personally, I don't think every issue can be handled by reasonable people because lots of people downright aren't reasonable.

So the, "Have a Coke and a smile," strategy doesn't work for all situations. That means that your last statement is an exaggeration. "In War, all are losers." No, in war, the losers are losers. The winners get to survive. Their nations are not conquered or destroyed. Their people are not wiped off the map. Their culture is not marginalized, etc.

WWII was one such war. We won. Losing was not an option. The Civil War was another. Losing in that case would have had a horrible result and, no, the South did NOT wish to negotiate.

of our troops perish/wounded/etc.

If a Nation or group of Nations attack us as in WW2, then we are expected to defend ourselves, this is a bit diff from what I had in mind. War is the last Option.

If we had sense, we would figure out ways to avoid war, hence a Peace Dept/

That doesn't mean I advocate dismantling of our armed forces, just parity in spending.

OK, I think even though I consider this idea pie in the sky, that I will speak for the more moderate DP supporters and point out that they are hoping for a much smaller amount of funding.

Your concept of parity is ludicrous. America is the world's lone remaining superpower. Even maintenance of SOME of our military commitments would result in a mega-bureaucracy created overnight. It would be an epic boondoggle with that funding level.

Frankly, $3 billion is a hell of a lot of money for something I think best handled by other agencies.

committments would result in a mega bureaucracy created over night."

To equal what we spend militarily -- even in a downsized military -- would be a mega-bureaucracy.

Everything is ludicrous, war is great, and lets continue with the killing. Don't let the grief of the families of dead soldiers bother you.

All the abused women and children are nothing to be concerned about... it doesn't affect the business of this country at all.

Let the gangs have at it... they're only killing off the riff-raff anyway, so they're doing us a favor.

Knowing that we can be a victim is good for us -- keeps us on our toes.

Yes, you're absolutely right. Any money spent for peace is ludicrous. I stand corrected.

I said the concept of funding parity is ludicrous. You can't start an organization over night and give them $300 billion. First off, the deficit damage would be massive. Second, the drive to spend that kind of money would be laughable.

Creating a department and mandating spending parity with DOD is ridiculous.

It's all ludicrous.

I've yet to ever see a post from you that is caring or supportive of anyone.

You always see something to criticise.

Your attitude is the exact opposite of your avatar. You might want to consider that.

Kanary

However, I live in the real world where stuff actually has to get voted on and pass in Congress. In that place, I try to think of realistic proposals and solutions. Trying to propose funding parity with the DOD does not reach any level of viability.

The problem as I see it is that you want to solve a greater problem with a solution that won't solve it. If you want to make our nation more peace friendly, then elect different leadership. That's who sets the tone, not agency heads and middle managers.

sound to Joe Sixpack. Oh, that's right - lots of people here believe that Joe Sixpack doesn't matter. All you need is ideological purity and the base will overwhelm everything. NOT. Ignoring Joe means that you lose. Joe won't read the entire proposal.

my cynicism returns.

Joe Six Pack must be addressed, in no uncertain terms. Are you saying its impossible?

If so. I join you at the bar, all this is moot.

May I reccomend some reading? "Non-zero. The Logic of Human Destiny" I read it in 2000, and he predicts the war on terror. He covers all of human history from about 50K years ago and sees the great pattern of history. He also predicts global peace.

Also, although it is a rather dated book: "Future Shock" by alvin Toffler. Amazon.com may have some copies. It is about 30 years old, but the concepts are valid, even if the examples aren't. Apply the concept to the Middle East and you can see why there are such problems in the region.

And do a Google on "Thermal Depolymerization". First plant being built in Carthage, MO, and due to go online anytime now, if not already. Great possibilities for alternative energy.

I see no future in DK's DOP idea, but I see lots of other avenues to peace. However, many of them are "non-traditional", and may be accomplished without the help, in fact despite the hinderance, of the usual crowd of demonstrators.

by Arthur Koestler, you will find out why I am a cynic, perhaps with a stubborn streak towards optimism.

In the book, you will find the argument for Emotionalism based on the evolution of the human brain. As we all know, Emotion is the factor that allows logic, reason, common sense, and reality, to be overcome, thus, we intentionally thrust ourselves into the realm of Fantasy.
Essentially, Koestler strongely argues we are a flawed species... destined for the short term. Only "Maturity" can save us from the brink of Extinction. I fail to see any such evidence.

What a stoooopid idea. Could never happen! Dumb Dem idealists should just go stick their collective heads in the toilet and get over it.

Peace Corps. Pah.

Kanary

make any needed changes quickly enough by that method. But there is still hope.

What is needed is a paradigm shift from Old School to New School. Meaning:: The MEism of today must change to that of WEism.

Of course shifts like this cannot happen overnight.....

Unless, something Dramatic Happens:

1, Astronomers discover astroid coming ... collision course. End of Earth in 5 years 2 months,1 week, and 4 days. WE come together to pool resources to deflect said rock.

2, Massive Famine / Disease hits Humans, 5 to 50 million dying per day. WE come together to fight challenge and recover.

3, Space Fleet detected, Approaching?? Friend or Foe?? Common enemy, WE come together to defend Species from Slavery? Exploitation? From being a "CROP?" Specimens for InterGalatic ZOOs?

4, Sanity Pill works. Dispite efforts to stifle, Pill is cleared for massive production in response to early demand. Enables Humanity to think clearly.

5, Global Warming escalates even faster. Glaciers melting faster and faster, Ocean levels rising. Florida building dikes, etc. We finally come together to find solutions, contend with consequences.

6. Nuke War is started.... in the after math, it is decided Peace WAS the better OPTION. Most of the Earth uninhabitibal for 7465867 years due to HIGH Rentgen count. About 75683 people left. They will have Peace.

'Joe Sixpack' votes Republican. He does it because he listens to the radio and TV and believes what he's told. We'll call him the "Bush Party Loyalist" vote. There's no winning him over.

Ignoring Joe does not mean that we'll lose. Democrats have been shifting right to try to court Joe for decades and it's ended up putting us in a very precarious position. Despite losing registered voters, seeing an increase in Green Party voters, and a consistent increase in the number of people who just don't vote anymore, some still persist in choosing to keep using the same tactics.

However, we can be optimistic if we simply consider that Joe Sixpack's mom and dad are retired. They have voted Republican since the 80's. Now they have been told that their Social Security and Medicare will have to be cut to afford the wars GeeDubya wants to wage. Joe Sixpack, when he does vote, is a lost cause to us. His mom and dad ALWAYS vote, and their votes are in play.

The New Deal programs so many take for granted now are in jeopardy. They are in jeopardy for several reasons, but one big one is the unbudgeted cost of waging wars for empire. AARP managed to alienate a large segement of the people most concerned and most likely to vote in their own interest. Get the message out that paying for these wars will end up costing them their security, and we can write off 'Joe Sixpack'.

and reap the consequences.

We've run after Joe for so long, and he just laughs. He isn't interested.

I see it in my own life, too. To heck with actually dealing with me.... gotta spend all our energy trying to convince the ones it's hopeless to convince. Meanwhile, the ones right in front of you, with hopelessness written all over their faces, are falling down in a heap. Then the DEms say, "How are we gonna get the poor registered, and voting??" They wring their hands over this. Simple. LISTEN TO THE POOR, CARE ABOUT THEM. SHORE UP THE SAFETY NET FOR THEM.

You can be sure they vote then, and vote for your party, your candidate. Ignore 'em and take 'em for granted while you go chasing old Joe, and you can be sure you'll be wondering why the low voter turnout.

Good post, redqueen. Where ya bean? I felt soooo abandoned...:-( :) :)

Kanary

www.kucinich.us