Dear Mr. President,
In recent months I have cautiously forayed into the realm of internet dating sites in an attempt to get past an increasingly long string of failed romantic endeavors. For better or worse, meeting people online has introduced me to several interesting and intelligent men I would never have otherwise encountered. That I connect with them initially through the internet doesn't bother me, though it makes several of my friends uncomfortable. I do understand the inherent risk, and also the capacity for deception, that goes along with any virtual communication. I've been chatting online since the early days of AOL, I've had livejournal accounts, myspace and facebook pages, and now I have this blog, which often consumes a considerable amount of my time and energy. I have friends I met online who I have never spoken to in person, and friends I met online who became friends outside of the internet, and more than a few friends who I relate to differently online than I do in person. (I do not tweet. I'm sure, in time, I will succumb to it, but for now it is the one craze I have yet to find any interest in.) Because so much of my time is spent on the internet, I'm inclined to disagree with those who discount any communication, interaction or relationship that occurs online as inauthentic. I have been lied to online, but I have also been lied to by people I love who look me in the eye when they lie to me. I think any interaction with another human requires a certain amount of faith and results in a certain amount of disappointment, regardless of where or how that interaction takes place. The person I am online, the person who writes these letters and rants about the issues that matter to me and who even sometimes speaks in humiliatingly bad blank verse that should be kept to myself, is just as much of who I am as the person you'd encounter if you met me. Words I say are not any more authentic than words I type.
Every now and then, however, I encounter online behavior that really makes me question the dichotomy of our actual selves and our online selves. The NRCC aide who posted home addresses for a Democratic candidates staff on Twitter, for example. Would this man have gone on Television and announced the home addresses of these other staffers? Would he have shouted them out at a rally? Furthermore, is such irresponsible behavior the product of the internet's illusion of anonymity or is this a reflection of the aide's true nature? Some politicians don't seem to have this problem. Vice President Biden, for example, surely is more likely to exercise restraint when he writes something online, (perhaps giving him the chance to consider if "big fucking deal" is really the descriptive phrase most appropriate.) I have no doubt that Sarah Palin's speaking style lends itself well to the 140-character limit and fluid spelling laws of Twitter, which is why her tweets sound (marginally) more coherent than anything she's ever said in an unscripted TV interview. If I could not hide behind the screen of my laptop, or easily revise my words, would my letters to you be different?
At the end of the day I don't think it matters if one version of me is more real than the other. So much of our interaction now takes place or relates to the internet that whatever distortion of personality or character it may create is irrelevant. I am accountable for my actions, just like the men I meet online or the friends I chat with online or the politicians who campaign online. While your campaign may have successfully used the internet as a means to connect with a younger generation of voters, that no longer seems to be the case. You once posted on DailyKos, your campaign's organizing efforts were legitimately grassroots and unique. Now it seems like the same generic intern-composed junk mail in my inbox day in and day out. It seems like you've cut out the blogging community and limited e-mail communication to re-worked versions of the same request for money. The authenticity is lacking, not because it's the internet, but because the efforts are stilted and hollow. Once, you seemed to understand the power of connecting with the voters through any media. You can reach so many voters online if you're willing to expend the same kind of personal energy that you do in campaign speeches or town hall meetings that reach only those lucky enough to live in a targeted area. Other members of your administration seem to be using the internet as an effective means of communicating with Americans; I hope that you reconsider your own efforts to ease the enthusiasm gap on the left in time for the election. A little sincerity could go a long way.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Showing posts with label Organizing for America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organizing for America. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Day 248- 10.2.2010
Dear Mr. President,
We on the left aren't usually content to be outdone by Glenn Beck, especially now that he fancies himself a Televangelist. So progressives are having their own march on Washington. I hope that the One Nation march manages to generate the excitement many progressives will need to show up on election day. It isn't an enthusiastic or well-organized Republican base that worries me, it is the return to apathy that many on the left had been quick to make once holding your administration to its promises got hard. Will a unity rally in DC make it all better? I suppose it probably can't make things worse.
But an election shouldn't have to have the hype of a music festival to get people to turn up for it. Voting should be something every American does out of a sense of their own responsibility to participate in our democracy. I suppose this is why I get so irritated at the patronizing OFA e-mails asking me to pledge that I will vote. I vote because it is in my interest to do so and I don't need a flashy patronizing campaign to convince me to do it. I have many friends who feel differently. Several didn't vote in 2008 and, when I reacted to this information with my characteristic tactlessness, they grew quite defensive. One even tried to convince me that voting was playing into the hands of those in power. I guess OFA might have their work cut out for them.
I think if you want to turn people out on election day you've got to prove to them that their vote actually matters. No amount of youtube videos or t-shirts or clever campaign slogans will energize voters like evidence that they are actually being listend to would. Have one honest and unscripted conversation with the American people and watch how quickly they show up to tell you what they think of it. Talk to us like we're informed adults and maybe we'll start voting like it.
Tonight on CNN I saw a headline that stopped my heart for a moment. "Peace Corps Volunteer killed in Africa" it read. And for the eternity it took the full story to load and inform me the tragedy took place in Lesotho and not where my best friend is serving, I could do nothing but worry. Once it was cleared up, I got angry. Would you see a similar headline for Asia or Europe or North America? No! Had the victim died on any other continent, the headline likely would have specified a country. This may be due to the fact that CNN assumes its audience has no idea where Lesotho is. Whenever I see the media, or a campaign, dumbing things down to a level it anticipates its readers to be more comfortable with, I feel offended. Expect us to know where Lesotho is, and we will learn. Expect us to understand the complexity of your policies and we will. Expect us to vote because it is our responsibility as Americans and we will vote. Stop treating Americans like we are only as good as our worst tendencies.
I hope that the One Nation rally is a success. I hope that the midterms are somewhat less of a tragedy than expected. Most of all, I hope you find a way to speak to the American people the way you used to. It's the only way you'll ever inspire the kind of support you'll need to win re-election.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
We on the left aren't usually content to be outdone by Glenn Beck, especially now that he fancies himself a Televangelist. So progressives are having their own march on Washington. I hope that the One Nation march manages to generate the excitement many progressives will need to show up on election day. It isn't an enthusiastic or well-organized Republican base that worries me, it is the return to apathy that many on the left had been quick to make once holding your administration to its promises got hard. Will a unity rally in DC make it all better? I suppose it probably can't make things worse.
But an election shouldn't have to have the hype of a music festival to get people to turn up for it. Voting should be something every American does out of a sense of their own responsibility to participate in our democracy. I suppose this is why I get so irritated at the patronizing OFA e-mails asking me to pledge that I will vote. I vote because it is in my interest to do so and I don't need a flashy patronizing campaign to convince me to do it. I have many friends who feel differently. Several didn't vote in 2008 and, when I reacted to this information with my characteristic tactlessness, they grew quite defensive. One even tried to convince me that voting was playing into the hands of those in power. I guess OFA might have their work cut out for them.
I think if you want to turn people out on election day you've got to prove to them that their vote actually matters. No amount of youtube videos or t-shirts or clever campaign slogans will energize voters like evidence that they are actually being listend to would. Have one honest and unscripted conversation with the American people and watch how quickly they show up to tell you what they think of it. Talk to us like we're informed adults and maybe we'll start voting like it.
Tonight on CNN I saw a headline that stopped my heart for a moment. "Peace Corps Volunteer killed in Africa" it read. And for the eternity it took the full story to load and inform me the tragedy took place in Lesotho and not where my best friend is serving, I could do nothing but worry. Once it was cleared up, I got angry. Would you see a similar headline for Asia or Europe or North America? No! Had the victim died on any other continent, the headline likely would have specified a country. This may be due to the fact that CNN assumes its audience has no idea where Lesotho is. Whenever I see the media, or a campaign, dumbing things down to a level it anticipates its readers to be more comfortable with, I feel offended. Expect us to know where Lesotho is, and we will learn. Expect us to understand the complexity of your policies and we will. Expect us to vote because it is our responsibility as Americans and we will vote. Stop treating Americans like we are only as good as our worst tendencies.
I hope that the One Nation rally is a success. I hope that the midterms are somewhat less of a tragedy than expected. Most of all, I hope you find a way to speak to the American people the way you used to. It's the only way you'll ever inspire the kind of support you'll need to win re-election.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, August 16, 2010
Day 228- Net Neutrality, or how I wax poetic about the Internet
For those who don't read my facebook and want a good laugh check out these comments from yesterday and Day 205. I'm gettin' schooled by a "real American"
OFA seems really concerned that I might not vote. For the record, even if I think this pledge is absurd, I encourage all of my readers to vote in every election, and I will be voting in 2010. If only OFA could provide some decently progressive candidates for me to vote for....
Dear Mr. President,
The amount of information we put out about ourselves on the internet makes it possible to feel like the people online might actually understand who we are. I often make the mistake of forgetting how easily I can be misunderstood, or how easily I can be found by those I would rather not find me. What we post on the internet feels anonymous, even as we risk exposure we cannot control. Angry, thoughtless words, outrageous opinions, even revealing photos all sent out for public consumption, haunting us when we least expect it. I believe these risks are the price I pay for whatever small role I play in the great abyss of the online community. For my connection to that unimaginably immense world. As your campaign continues to demonstrate, the internet can also be a powerful tool to organize, to bring people together. It's ability to empower individuals even when they are isolated physically to connect with others, to teach and learn from one another, has forever altered the way we approach the world.
Whatever the internet is or represents, its neutrality should not be threatened. The internet should not be governed by corporations, access should not be dictated by money or influence. Defending net neutrality was an important promise of your campaign and one you cannot afford to break. Congressman Jay Inslee has come out strongly in defense of net neutrality while discussing the recent Google/Verizon deal:
The internet is complex and challenging and maybe the most important technology of our time. Whatever it is, and whatever it will be, its power and beauty is a direct reflection of humanity's diverse and complicated nature, the unique strength, talent and genius that every person has to contribute. Keeping access to innovation and information free and equal is essential to keeping all of us free and equal. I have almost lost hope that we can wrest even this small part of our lives away from complete corporate exploitation; that money and power can't control the truth. If we trade away this freedom piece by piece to the highest bidder we will never get it back. We elected you to make sure this doesn't happen, and I hope that you don't let us down.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
OFA seems really concerned that I might not vote. For the record, even if I think this pledge is absurd, I encourage all of my readers to vote in every election, and I will be voting in 2010. If only OFA could provide some decently progressive candidates for me to vote for....
Dear Mr. President,
The amount of information we put out about ourselves on the internet makes it possible to feel like the people online might actually understand who we are. I often make the mistake of forgetting how easily I can be misunderstood, or how easily I can be found by those I would rather not find me. What we post on the internet feels anonymous, even as we risk exposure we cannot control. Angry, thoughtless words, outrageous opinions, even revealing photos all sent out for public consumption, haunting us when we least expect it. I believe these risks are the price I pay for whatever small role I play in the great abyss of the online community. For my connection to that unimaginably immense world. As your campaign continues to demonstrate, the internet can also be a powerful tool to organize, to bring people together. It's ability to empower individuals even when they are isolated physically to connect with others, to teach and learn from one another, has forever altered the way we approach the world.
Whatever the internet is or represents, its neutrality should not be threatened. The internet should not be governed by corporations, access should not be dictated by money or influence. Defending net neutrality was an important promise of your campaign and one you cannot afford to break. Congressman Jay Inslee has come out strongly in defense of net neutrality while discussing the recent Google/Verizon deal:
Google and Verizon are businesses trying to make a buck -- I guess that's their job. But it's now time members of Congress stand with me and tell the FCC to do its job.Mr. Inslee is right- private companies have to tend to their profits, not to the interests of the people. The internet is too personal to be manipulated this way. This is a topic that has been explored far more eloquently by several (better-informed) writers than myself, and I hope that you are paying attention to them, and to laymen like me who just want to add our voices to the demand that our access continue without manipulation. As I'm sure you know, this isn't just the right thing to do; a grassroots group like Organizing for America couldn't capitalize on the power of individuals connecting and organizing online if corporations are allowed to bid for the best access to that power. Net neutrality is essential to a modern and free America- and I'm sure you know that re-election in 2012 will not be possible for you without it.
The internet is complex and challenging and maybe the most important technology of our time. Whatever it is, and whatever it will be, its power and beauty is a direct reflection of humanity's diverse and complicated nature, the unique strength, talent and genius that every person has to contribute. Keeping access to innovation and information free and equal is essential to keeping all of us free and equal. I have almost lost hope that we can wrest even this small part of our lives away from complete corporate exploitation; that money and power can't control the truth. If we trade away this freedom piece by piece to the highest bidder we will never get it back. We elected you to make sure this doesn't happen, and I hope that you don't let us down.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Day 226- Perseids
Update: President Obama seems to have walked back his courageous words from last night to the tepid centrism he's clearly more comfortable with. *SIGH*
Dear Mr. President,
Thursday night, two friends and I stayed out late to watch the Perseid meteor shower. Though we were not far from the city, a local park provided enough darkness to witness the truly impressive show the stars were putting on that night. It was an unusually chilly August night, and we huddled in blankets and sleeping bags to keep out the cold. At times it looked like the sky was being torn, the meteors were so bright. I've been an amateur astronomy geek my whole life, but I've never seen anything half as amazing as the Perseids.
While lying there, we were discussing your impending visit to Seattle. We'd like to come see you, but we're not exactly in a financial position to afford a plate at Patty Murray's fundraiser. (That being said, I hope your presence draws a considerable crowd. If Murray loses to either of her Republican challengers it will be a sad day indeed for Washington voters and the Senate.) We thought about trying to find a place in the crowd outside to catch even a glimpse of the President we admire and helped elect. Perhaps the light show in the sky contributed to my very small, powerless feeling at that moment. I joked that I should bring one of the form letters the White House has sent me, to see if I could get you to sign it for real. Inside, I wasn't quite so amused at my own insignificance.
It isn't that I think I'm important enough to deserve your attention, Mr. President. It's the helplessness of knowing that so few people like me will ever have any hope of catching your ear, let alone being heard. When I say people like me, I mean the non-wealthy, non-swing-state-voter, non-elderly. That class that isn't middle class enough to make a good all-American photo op. Just a little too far left to be taken seriously. You might tape a message to Netroots Nation, but talking at us and listening to us are worlds apart. There's no power to be gained in taking my generation seriously, I suppose, but we are the next leaders of this country and a significant factor in your re-election.
Shortly after Robert Gibbs' remarks about the professional left, I got an e-mail, (ostensibly from you, but clearly written by an intern,) asking me to commit to vote in 2010. To sign my name to promise that I'll be there. This transparent scramble for reassuring data was probably the most offensive OFA e-mail I've ever received. You want me to commit to supporting your candidates? After your press secretary trashed the ideological left? While your administration acts like we're nothing more than a shrill pest? I'm sorry, Mr. President, but you're going to have to do a lot better than a form e-mail to re-engage your base. I'm not asking for an autograph, a seat at the table, or even a new press secretary; I'm asking for an administration that actually empowers the people it asks to show up on election day. A White House that feels less like watching a barely-comprehensible cosmic event and more like a group of people who have the interests of voters (and not just donors) at heart.
Anyway, Mr. President, maybe it's just been a rough week. I wish there was some way I could show you how much I want to believe in you, and in this country again. I wish there was some way of reaching you at all. Even if it's just as useless as shouting at the sky, I'm going to keep writing, keep blogging, keep pestering you about the things you promised us. If you never respond to a single letter, if you never know I exist at all, that's fine. I just hope you find a way to hear the parts of this country you're ignoring, before you realize they won't be coming out to vote in November.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
Thursday night, two friends and I stayed out late to watch the Perseid meteor shower. Though we were not far from the city, a local park provided enough darkness to witness the truly impressive show the stars were putting on that night. It was an unusually chilly August night, and we huddled in blankets and sleeping bags to keep out the cold. At times it looked like the sky was being torn, the meteors were so bright. I've been an amateur astronomy geek my whole life, but I've never seen anything half as amazing as the Perseids.
While lying there, we were discussing your impending visit to Seattle. We'd like to come see you, but we're not exactly in a financial position to afford a plate at Patty Murray's fundraiser. (That being said, I hope your presence draws a considerable crowd. If Murray loses to either of her Republican challengers it will be a sad day indeed for Washington voters and the Senate.) We thought about trying to find a place in the crowd outside to catch even a glimpse of the President we admire and helped elect. Perhaps the light show in the sky contributed to my very small, powerless feeling at that moment. I joked that I should bring one of the form letters the White House has sent me, to see if I could get you to sign it for real. Inside, I wasn't quite so amused at my own insignificance.
It isn't that I think I'm important enough to deserve your attention, Mr. President. It's the helplessness of knowing that so few people like me will ever have any hope of catching your ear, let alone being heard. When I say people like me, I mean the non-wealthy, non-swing-state-voter, non-elderly. That class that isn't middle class enough to make a good all-American photo op. Just a little too far left to be taken seriously. You might tape a message to Netroots Nation, but talking at us and listening to us are worlds apart. There's no power to be gained in taking my generation seriously, I suppose, but we are the next leaders of this country and a significant factor in your re-election.
Shortly after Robert Gibbs' remarks about the professional left, I got an e-mail, (ostensibly from you, but clearly written by an intern,) asking me to commit to vote in 2010. To sign my name to promise that I'll be there. This transparent scramble for reassuring data was probably the most offensive OFA e-mail I've ever received. You want me to commit to supporting your candidates? After your press secretary trashed the ideological left? While your administration acts like we're nothing more than a shrill pest? I'm sorry, Mr. President, but you're going to have to do a lot better than a form e-mail to re-engage your base. I'm not asking for an autograph, a seat at the table, or even a new press secretary; I'm asking for an administration that actually empowers the people it asks to show up on election day. A White House that feels less like watching a barely-comprehensible cosmic event and more like a group of people who have the interests of voters (and not just donors) at heart.
Anyway, Mr. President, maybe it's just been a rough week. I wish there was some way I could show you how much I want to believe in you, and in this country again. I wish there was some way of reaching you at all. Even if it's just as useless as shouting at the sky, I'm going to keep writing, keep blogging, keep pestering you about the things you promised us. If you never respond to a single letter, if you never know I exist at all, that's fine. I just hope you find a way to hear the parts of this country you're ignoring, before you realize they won't be coming out to vote in November.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Day 202- One new national foundation- only $5!
Dear Mr. President,
I got an email from OFA today, or, if I'm to take it seriously, from you. It's actually more personalized than most of the form letters I've gotten in the mail. This was my favorite part:
You and I did not build this movement to win one election. We did not come together to pass one single piece of legislation. We are fighting for nothing less than a new foundation for our country -- and that work is not complete. As we face the challenges ahead, I am relying on you to stand with me.
Please donate $5 or more today:
I know there isn't really a way to send a mass e-mail asking for money and not come across as, well, kind of tacky. I get these OFA emails every few days and, I have to admit, that attempt to make me feel important and part of the club, it comes across as completely phony. I don't like being patronized. I don't need to have my sense of importance inflated. I don't think these methods actually get you more money.
I donated anyway. I think that OFA is doing good work, and that, even if my donation counts only as $10 against the Tea Party and the Republicans who serve them, it's worth it. I don't think imagine it will buy me influence, or even a marginal improvement in the policies or practices of your administration. But I believe it's a start. I think the 2008 election was a victory for many of the poor, disenfranchised and forgotten; a demonstration of the power that those of us non-millionaires still have over our national destiny. My $10 might not buy this country a new foundation, it might not get me a signed photo or a handshake or even a less annoying OFA email, but it's probably better spent promoting liberal(ish) candidates than buying me a week's worth of Americanos.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Readers: If my cynicism isn't too catching, you, too, can buy a new foundation for our country by donating to Organizing For America.
I got an email from OFA today, or, if I'm to take it seriously, from you. It's actually more personalized than most of the form letters I've gotten in the mail. This was my favorite part:
You and I did not build this movement to win one election. We did not come together to pass one single piece of legislation. We are fighting for nothing less than a new foundation for our country -- and that work is not complete. As we face the challenges ahead, I am relying on you to stand with me.
Please donate $5 or more today:
I know there isn't really a way to send a mass e-mail asking for money and not come across as, well, kind of tacky. I get these OFA emails every few days and, I have to admit, that attempt to make me feel important and part of the club, it comes across as completely phony. I don't like being patronized. I don't need to have my sense of importance inflated. I don't think these methods actually get you more money.
I donated anyway. I think that OFA is doing good work, and that, even if my donation counts only as $10 against the Tea Party and the Republicans who serve them, it's worth it. I don't think imagine it will buy me influence, or even a marginal improvement in the policies or practices of your administration. But I believe it's a start. I think the 2008 election was a victory for many of the poor, disenfranchised and forgotten; a demonstration of the power that those of us non-millionaires still have over our national destiny. My $10 might not buy this country a new foundation, it might not get me a signed photo or a handshake or even a less annoying OFA email, but it's probably better spent promoting liberal(ish) candidates than buying me a week's worth of Americanos.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Readers: If my cynicism isn't too catching, you, too, can buy a new foundation for our country by donating to Organizing For America.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Day 154- The Millennials
Dear Mr. President,
I was pleasantly surprised to learn tonight that my generation has a name. We are, apparently, the Millennials. (I don't recall being asked for input when this name was chosen. I doubt I'd have approved, but I suppose it's better than "Generation Y") Timothy Egan is calling on us to "save" our country from the boomers. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Egan, and I did find it surprising to learn that more 18-29 year olds voted in 2008 than those over 65. This has clearly not escaped the notice of Organizing For America, which almost daily contacts me asking for participation or support. I am comforted by this. Demographics are on my side, as the ruling class of this country grows (slowly) younger, my hope is that things will (slowly) improve. I think Egan's points are well-taken; my generation's views on gay rights, environmental issues and the wars launched under President Bush may have been ahead of our time and now widely accepted. However, our participation has done little to fundamentally change the system or the way we ourselves are perceived by those in power. (Evidenced even here, by Egan's quip about our ability to leave our facebook pages long enough to elect you, forgetting, perhaps, the role that social networking and blogs played in that election.)
This thought strikes me most often when I am asked about my tattoos. I have seven, and will soon have eight. According to a recent post on the freakonomics blog, 36 percent of 18-25 year olds, and 40 percent of 26-40 year olds have tattoos. When people express their concern that the body art I have no will be detrimental to my professional success, I like to consider this statistic. I currently have a job where, despite making less than $10/hour and having little to no consequence in society, I have to keep my tattoos covered up. I respect that, as my employer, this company can make me wear whatever it pleases. I do not generally find that my tattoos affect my ability to make coffee, or my customer's enjoyment of said coffee. While I do think that my tattoos say something about me as a person, I don't think that having tattoos in general does. I reject the notion that they make me less professional or respectable, and that is because I respect myself (and my professionalism) more than I care for the opinions of those who would judge me on what they see. (Arrogance? Perhaps. I'll call it self-assurance and be quite content to keep it. ) My generation's willingness to accept a person for what is on the inside may largely be attributed to the often-faceless modes of interaction we have with one another online, and helps us to get past the kind of appearance-based prejudices that still hinder our parents.
But my generation has our faults, too. We often mistake awareness for action; blogging about something or updating our facebook status to support a cause is fine and good, but we vote most effectively with our dollar, and too many of us forget our idealism once we have to put money on it. Our demographic being among the most targeted by advertisers, we ought to have a greater impact on the policies of those companies whose products we consume than we do our government. I have many friends who are game for any kind of political discussion or debate, but who grow defensive and angry when their own purchasing decisions are called into question. If we're really going to steer this country in a better direction than our parents, we have to put our money where our well-intentioned tweets are.
I respect your and OFA's efforts to engage us; I can offer my personal pledge to do my part to help elect progressive candidates in 2010. But beyond voting, beyond organizing voting efforts, my generation has to do more. Egan, and OFA, are not asking us to save the country with our progressive vision, they're asking us to do so by electing the last generation of progressives. To show up on election day, and then to let the grown-ups take things from there. I think it's time that more of us ran for local, state and federal office ourselves; that we begin shaping our destinies through direct participation and not just by voting.
Finally, I'd like to acknowledge the death of one Millennial, Turkish-American Furkan Dogan, who, at 19, was killed on the Mavi Marmara, attempting to do bring hope and aid to the people of Gaza. His death ought to remind all of us, young and old, to honor those giving their lives for justice. If we had more elected officials willing to demonstrate this kind of courage, perhaps the youth of this nation would not be called upon to do it for them.
And now, I return to my mindless social networking. See you on Election Day.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I was pleasantly surprised to learn tonight that my generation has a name. We are, apparently, the Millennials. (I don't recall being asked for input when this name was chosen. I doubt I'd have approved, but I suppose it's better than "Generation Y") Timothy Egan is calling on us to "save" our country from the boomers. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Egan, and I did find it surprising to learn that more 18-29 year olds voted in 2008 than those over 65. This has clearly not escaped the notice of Organizing For America, which almost daily contacts me asking for participation or support. I am comforted by this. Demographics are on my side, as the ruling class of this country grows (slowly) younger, my hope is that things will (slowly) improve. I think Egan's points are well-taken; my generation's views on gay rights, environmental issues and the wars launched under President Bush may have been ahead of our time and now widely accepted. However, our participation has done little to fundamentally change the system or the way we ourselves are perceived by those in power. (Evidenced even here, by Egan's quip about our ability to leave our facebook pages long enough to elect you, forgetting, perhaps, the role that social networking and blogs played in that election.)
This thought strikes me most often when I am asked about my tattoos. I have seven, and will soon have eight. According to a recent post on the freakonomics blog, 36 percent of 18-25 year olds, and 40 percent of 26-40 year olds have tattoos. When people express their concern that the body art I have no will be detrimental to my professional success, I like to consider this statistic. I currently have a job where, despite making less than $10/hour and having little to no consequence in society, I have to keep my tattoos covered up. I respect that, as my employer, this company can make me wear whatever it pleases. I do not generally find that my tattoos affect my ability to make coffee, or my customer's enjoyment of said coffee. While I do think that my tattoos say something about me as a person, I don't think that having tattoos in general does. I reject the notion that they make me less professional or respectable, and that is because I respect myself (and my professionalism) more than I care for the opinions of those who would judge me on what they see. (Arrogance? Perhaps. I'll call it self-assurance and be quite content to keep it. ) My generation's willingness to accept a person for what is on the inside may largely be attributed to the often-faceless modes of interaction we have with one another online, and helps us to get past the kind of appearance-based prejudices that still hinder our parents.
But my generation has our faults, too. We often mistake awareness for action; blogging about something or updating our facebook status to support a cause is fine and good, but we vote most effectively with our dollar, and too many of us forget our idealism once we have to put money on it. Our demographic being among the most targeted by advertisers, we ought to have a greater impact on the policies of those companies whose products we consume than we do our government. I have many friends who are game for any kind of political discussion or debate, but who grow defensive and angry when their own purchasing decisions are called into question. If we're really going to steer this country in a better direction than our parents, we have to put our money where our well-intentioned tweets are.
I respect your and OFA's efforts to engage us; I can offer my personal pledge to do my part to help elect progressive candidates in 2010. But beyond voting, beyond organizing voting efforts, my generation has to do more. Egan, and OFA, are not asking us to save the country with our progressive vision, they're asking us to do so by electing the last generation of progressives. To show up on election day, and then to let the grown-ups take things from there. I think it's time that more of us ran for local, state and federal office ourselves; that we begin shaping our destinies through direct participation and not just by voting.
Finally, I'd like to acknowledge the death of one Millennial, Turkish-American Furkan Dogan, who, at 19, was killed on the Mavi Marmara, attempting to do bring hope and aid to the people of Gaza. His death ought to remind all of us, young and old, to honor those giving their lives for justice. If we had more elected officials willing to demonstrate this kind of courage, perhaps the youth of this nation would not be called upon to do it for them.
And now, I return to my mindless social networking. See you on Election Day.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Day 125- Why I'm still drinking the koolaid
Dear Mr. President,
Cults make me uncomfortable. I choke on the corporatespeak they feed us at work. I can't stomach the suspension of disbelief required for organized religion. I'm a skeptical person by nature and I can't shut off the part of me that constantly questions what I am told. I do not often fit in with ideologies, isms or cults of personality. And yet, I drink the Hope Koolaid better than almost any one I know.
It's not that I think you're always right; it's not that I think you always make the best choices or even act with the best of intentions. You're really my last hope, these days. I can't give up, believe the system to be hopelessly corrupt and refuse to participate; that would hand my power as a citizen over to some one else. I can't, honestly, envision a viable third party candidate, especially one who is more representative of my beliefs than you are. I have to believe in your wisdom and in your goodness, because if you're not the person best able to steer our nation right now, I'm at a loss for who the alternative would be.
This is not to say that my support for you is out of a lack of other options. Maybe it's just as irrational and just as naive as any other kind of faith, but it is more than blind loyalty. I do have issues with your policies and some of your beliefs, but I think, even among the Democrats, you're the person I respect the most because of the way you approach problems. I have a tremendous amount of faith in the people of this country; in my generation and the force of demographics to, slowly, move us closer to a fairer, freer and more just nation; I also know I can't change anything acting by myself. I believe that the change you promised us will come, probably long after you've left office, but we have to keep working toward it, more slowly than any one will find acceptable.
I am subject to the system, as are you. The difference, I think, is that I have the capacity to shift it very little, while you seem to have accepted too much of the status quo as inevitable, without consideration of your own, considerably greater, power to change it. You don't have to accept things as they've always been; be it the wars you inherited, the legacy of American imperialism, our backwards and bigoted social policies or the same old blue dog incumbents in the Democratic party. Your campaign empowered so many of the disenfranchised of this nation; it isn't hubris to reject the trappings of the system that disenfranchised them in the first place. The 17 months of your presidency have seen no shortage of missed opportunities to bring about the kind of change you asked us all to hope for; but I'm raising a glass, and keeping the faith, for the two and half years you've got left.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Cults make me uncomfortable. I choke on the corporatespeak they feed us at work. I can't stomach the suspension of disbelief required for organized religion. I'm a skeptical person by nature and I can't shut off the part of me that constantly questions what I am told. I do not often fit in with ideologies, isms or cults of personality. And yet, I drink the Hope Koolaid better than almost any one I know.
It's not that I think you're always right; it's not that I think you always make the best choices or even act with the best of intentions. You're really my last hope, these days. I can't give up, believe the system to be hopelessly corrupt and refuse to participate; that would hand my power as a citizen over to some one else. I can't, honestly, envision a viable third party candidate, especially one who is more representative of my beliefs than you are. I have to believe in your wisdom and in your goodness, because if you're not the person best able to steer our nation right now, I'm at a loss for who the alternative would be.
This is not to say that my support for you is out of a lack of other options. Maybe it's just as irrational and just as naive as any other kind of faith, but it is more than blind loyalty. I do have issues with your policies and some of your beliefs, but I think, even among the Democrats, you're the person I respect the most because of the way you approach problems. I have a tremendous amount of faith in the people of this country; in my generation and the force of demographics to, slowly, move us closer to a fairer, freer and more just nation; I also know I can't change anything acting by myself. I believe that the change you promised us will come, probably long after you've left office, but we have to keep working toward it, more slowly than any one will find acceptable.
I am subject to the system, as are you. The difference, I think, is that I have the capacity to shift it very little, while you seem to have accepted too much of the status quo as inevitable, without consideration of your own, considerably greater, power to change it. You don't have to accept things as they've always been; be it the wars you inherited, the legacy of American imperialism, our backwards and bigoted social policies or the same old blue dog incumbents in the Democratic party. Your campaign empowered so many of the disenfranchised of this nation; it isn't hubris to reject the trappings of the system that disenfranchised them in the first place. The 17 months of your presidency have seen no shortage of missed opportunities to bring about the kind of change you asked us all to hope for; but I'm raising a glass, and keeping the faith, for the two and half years you've got left.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, April 26, 2010
Day 116
“I am deeply disappointed that Senate Republicans voted in a block against allowing a public debate on Wall Street reform to begin. Some of these Senators may believe that this obstruction is a good political strategy, and others may see delay as an opportunity to take this debate behind closed doors, where financial industry lobbyists can water down reform or kill it altogether. But the American people can’t afford that. A lack of consumer protections and a lack of accountability on Wall Street nearly brought our economy to its knees, and helped cause the pain that has left millions of Americans without jobs and without homes. The reform that both parties have been working on for a year would prevent a crisis like this from happening again, and I urge the Senate to get back to work and put the interests of the country ahead of party.
President Barack Obama, 4/26/2010
Dear Mr. President,
Today's setback in the fight for financial reform was disappointing, but I hope that senate Democrats will not back down. Are the Republicans ever going to stop obstructing legislation for the sake of politics? If my state had any republican Senators, I'd be incredibly disappointed in them. I hope voters in the states represented by these 41 no votes make sure their Senators are held accountable for being so out of touch.
Speaking of my home state of Washington, the Organizing For America e-mail today about our 2010 strategy got me thinking about Senator Murray's re-election. Dino Rossi, the man likely to be selected to run against her, has failed in his attempts to become our governor for as long as I can remember. He's not a complete hack; he's a tasteless campaigner unafraid of blanketing the state airwaves with negative ads, but when he served in the Washington State Senate he was relatively bipartisan and accomplished a fair amount for a republican. That being said, I was really hoping he'd slink off into the abyss of political obscurity after losing gubernatorial campaigns twice in a row. If OFA wants me to help Senator Murray hand him yet another defeat, I'd be honored to do so. Rossi, as a Washington Republican, might still be further left than many of the blue dog Democrats, but today's block of financial reform legislation clearly demonstrates that independently-minded Republicans certainly don't act that way when it counts.
I know that there will be many tight races this year, and a number of those Democrats will need your help campaigning and raising money. I hope that you schedule allows you to visit Seattle to help Senator Murray, as well. We're really a lovely city, and besides, your favorite chocolates are here, waiting for you.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
President Barack Obama, 4/26/2010
Dear Mr. President,
Today's setback in the fight for financial reform was disappointing, but I hope that senate Democrats will not back down. Are the Republicans ever going to stop obstructing legislation for the sake of politics? If my state had any republican Senators, I'd be incredibly disappointed in them. I hope voters in the states represented by these 41 no votes make sure their Senators are held accountable for being so out of touch.
Speaking of my home state of Washington, the Organizing For America e-mail today about our 2010 strategy got me thinking about Senator Murray's re-election. Dino Rossi, the man likely to be selected to run against her, has failed in his attempts to become our governor for as long as I can remember. He's not a complete hack; he's a tasteless campaigner unafraid of blanketing the state airwaves with negative ads, but when he served in the Washington State Senate he was relatively bipartisan and accomplished a fair amount for a republican. That being said, I was really hoping he'd slink off into the abyss of political obscurity after losing gubernatorial campaigns twice in a row. If OFA wants me to help Senator Murray hand him yet another defeat, I'd be honored to do so. Rossi, as a Washington Republican, might still be further left than many of the blue dog Democrats, but today's block of financial reform legislation clearly demonstrates that independently-minded Republicans certainly don't act that way when it counts.
I know that there will be many tight races this year, and a number of those Democrats will need your help campaigning and raising money. I hope that you schedule allows you to visit Seattle to help Senator Murray, as well. We're really a lovely city, and besides, your favorite chocolates are here, waiting for you.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
