Symbolism vs. Reality

[dimpy.handa]

Would it hurt to remove "special" individuals who monopolize resources and decision making? Only those afraid of participating, as well as those benefitting from the power structure.
In theory there might be a relationship where permanent authority is desirable, but I haven't seen it personally. I think dependence on leadership easily leads to terrible things.

Example:
"'The Australian government knows that Iraq still has chemical and
biological weapons,' Howard told parliament in February, while Lewincamp insists it was too early to make a definitive judgement.
If Howard is found to have lied to parliament, perhaps even the Australian
public will be woken from their customary political apathy. Who knows?"

 

[shivibhanot]

First, if the facts Saul cites are the standard for a strong civil rights record, his argument doesn't hold up today the way it may have historically. Let's take a look at the balance in the 110th Congress: There are 42 black Democratic Representatives in the House vs. no black Republicans. 53 Democratic women Representatives in the House vs. 20 Republican women. While meaningful, the GOP having the "first" black or women representatives is no longer relevant to our modern political discourse.

Of course, the notion that the GOP, which absorbed the Dixiecrats, has a strong history on civil rights because of these "firsts" is absurd. The broader problem with Saul's statement is that it reflects the GOP's tendency co-opt progressive civil rights symbols for the purpose of justifying regressive policies.

nirmal :: The GOP and Civil Rights: Symbolism vs. Reality
Take Sarah Palin: by self-identifying as a feminist, invoking Hillary Clinton in her first campaign speeches, and as potentially the first woman Vice President of the United States, she adopted many of the symbols of women's empowerment. Although she claimed the symbols of feminism, her actual purpose on the campaign trail was to reinforce existing gender roles. Culturally, she reinforced these existing gender norms by masking her ambition and "putting a skirt on," as conservative commentators put it. In terms of public policy, she's virulently anti-choice, opposes birth control and emergency contraception even in extreme cases, believes in abstinence-only education, and wouldn't take a position on equal pay. She portrayed herself as a figure of women's empowerment while undermining feminism as a movement.