Home | About | Donate

What Was Won in Selma 50 Years Ago Being Lost Today


#1

What Was Won in Selma 50 Years Ago Being Lost Today

Leonard Pitts Jr.

First, they sang God Will Take Care of You.

Then they walked out of Brown Chapel to a playground where they organized themselves into 24 groups of 25 each and set out marching. Their route out of Selma took them onto Highway 80, which is carried over the Alabama River by a bridge named in honor of Confederate general and Alabama Ku Klux Klan leader Edmund W. Pettus.

It was about 2:30 on the afternoon of Sunday, March 7, 1965.


#2

What was won by voters, women, workers, the environment and minorities over the last 100 years is being lost today as well.

Until all the 99% join together for all our related causes, the 0.01% will control the 1% to deny us our rights, wealth and liberty.


#3

And voting matters because...? It's difficult to get too upset about voting rights when regardless of what candidates we are offered in our sham election system, the outcome is the same: more war, more class divide, less civil liberties. Pitts should wake up to the fact that it's not all about him and his demographic. It's about us, the have-nots, versus them, the haves.


#4

You make my point. That voting no longer matters makes it a lost civil right. It is not the act of marking an "X" on a ballot that is lost, but the power that ballot once carried and no longer does that is lost.


#5

Your comment and that of Jangels work very nicely to align with Fox News style Conservative views in that both make light of the very real particularities of racism and sexism. It's just so "generous" for white guys to yell, "Gee, can't we put all this "divisive identity stuff" on the back burner and all get along." As if. Progress is made due to growth at the fringes. "Black Lives Matter," "Idle No More," and college females responding to the rape culture are all necessary facets of the struggle for human rights within a humane world. What's lost on many white males is the FACT that prejudices like racism and sexism are so embedded into U.S. (and other) culture, that THEY take these insults for unquestioned "reality." They remain clueless to what these prejudices mean to millions of very real persons' lives.

No, white boys... it's no longer your turn to call all the shots and claim to speak for all.


#6

If the outcome is the same, could it possibly be because we keep making the same choices over and over? Given that simple fact, how could one expect anything different?

We ARE offered better candidates, but we don't choose them, opting instead for the same old duopoly choices because we all "know", of course, that "TINA", that 3rd parties "can't win" or are "spoilers" and all that other BS that TPTB have shoved down our throats for so long ....

Hey, here's a thought, why not try something new and see what happens ....


#7

Yup, they are ll necessary facets, but until they join together in a cohesive whole and we all march under a banner of "ALL lives matter" we will continue to be divided and played off against one another - and that has worked so well for so long to entrench TPTB, one would think we would have figured that out by now ...


#8

The point A_P and I are making is this. As important as each of these individual group's/demographic's issues may be, the divide and conquer paradigm (which is being used against us) outweighs each groups needs. Until we all join together and address the larger "haves vs. have-nots" umbrella issue, none of the individual groups will make any real progress. Certainly no progress that can't be undone by our corrupt and absurd system of elections and governance in which money wins out over all other considerations of race, gender, etc.

Oh, and by the way, why do you assume I'm a "white boy?" A little racial profiling of your own in play it seems.


#9

Another alternative is to simply insist that "non-votes" be given the same weight as votes cast. That way candidates would have to inspire sufficient voter to get off the couch for the winner to gain an actual 50%+1 of the ELIGIBLE voters.

People who don't vote aren't saying "whoever wins the horserace can do what he/she likes". They are saying NONE of the "viable" candidates are worth the effort of voting for, and that includes the splinter candidates.

If the splinter candidates/parties were THAT much better, different than the duopoly, they'd get more votes. But because they are often selling single-issue or extreme-position politics, John and Jane Q. Public can't identify with them, nor be motivated to "make a difference".

It doesn't help that the duopoly uses the state police/spy/media to limit public awareness of, or access to, alternatives.

If voting, particularly for non-Dem/Rep candidates is to have an effect, and because the internet is now unsafe for significant organizing, the time has come to be knock on our neighbours' doors outside the election propaganda cycle. The public needs to see that true pan-issue progressive activists live where they do, and are not just there to grab votes, then disappear for 4 years.


#10

Well actually - folks often don't even know there are other choices than D/Rs .... And there is the "can't win" effect - if folks believe a candidate "can't win", they simply don't vote for 'em .... Never mind that any candidate on the ballot can win, if enough folks vote for 'em. i wish i had a nickle for everytime i have heard - "yeah, i agree with so and so, but i won't vote for 'em cause (s)he can't win"

But i do agree that a door to door campaign is necessary ....