Home » Campaigns » jonathan farnick for il-08 » Blog » David Sirota in Chicago

Democracy for America campaign blog for jonathan farnick for il-08

David Sirota in Chicago

Written by: Sandra Verthein on Jul 3, 2008 8:16 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Northside DFA

[This essay was written by NDFA Steering Committee member Frank Palmer about our June 21st Northside DFA forum. The photo was taken by NDFA member Fran Tobin.]

Sirota_Forum_Crowd

David Sirota, author of the New York Times best sellers The Uprising and Hostile Takeover, spoke in a NDFA forum in Edgewater about his books and his political beliefs. The format -- he was interviewed by Ben Joravsky of The Reader and then answered questions from the audience -- was somewhat discursive, but Sirota returned to several recurring themes.

Sirota rejects waiting for the ideal politician to be elected to a position from which he can solve our problems. He thinks that the proposed solutions have to come from below with enough pressure to make their passage politically profitable. He pointed to Lyndon Johnson's adoption of the civil rights ideal; Johnson's political record before the White House supported segregation. Sirota pointed out that these groundswells have long periods of organized preparation before they reach the consciousness of the electorate. (And he pointed out elsewhere that politicians were usually the last to notice.) He quoted FDR speaking to some advocacy group: "You've convinced me. Now make me do it."

Asked specifically about Barack Obama, whom he has praised elsewhere, he said that Obama is passionate about themes, not about policies. An Obama administration would be open to solutions from the grassroots, but we should not expect the election of  Obama to provide the solutions. Again, change comes from below; only when the people are convinced will the leaders follow.

(Continued.)

One of the audience asked whether the people shouting "change" are dupes or a new force. Sirota's answer was that some are one and some are the other. Simply getting Obama in will not bring solutions, but it will bring a new openness for solutions from the bottom. Some of his supporters will become disillusioned and cynical when the change is slow. Conservatives will exploit those as they have done before. Some of them, we hope, will stay organized and put forth new agendas. "The best politician is a worried politician," he said. He likes the situation in New York City where term limits for city council lead to a constant supply of former council members looking to move up. That makes congressmen and state representatives nervous, which makes them more responsive to their constituents. (Other than that positive benefit, he doesn't support term limits for legislators; he does for executive positions.) For related reasons, he favors primaries whenever possible. This is especially important in one-party districts.

Joravsky asked what would be the first steps for people taking back the power in their
government. Sirota's first step was merely to get to know each other. We can't do anything until we do that. His second was to pick a target. You only need to put one politician at risk to make all his colleagues nervous.

Sirota compared the relation of politicians to laws to that of corporations. Corporations are in the business of maximizing profits. They will do anything that they can do to make money. The answer is not to ask that they improve their ethics; the answer is for government and laws to regulate what they can do. Similarly, we don't need more ethical politicians. We need laws that restrict what they can do and punish transgressions. Among the lws that he mentioned are more restrictions on campaign finances.

Sirota was asked how he got started. His first introduction to politics was as a high-school sophomore in Philadelphia. He took a class with seniors which involved a good deal of research on the Kennedy administration. As one of the few underclassmen, he bore much of the burden of the research. He went to college in Chicago, and got involved in Howie Carrol's campaign to succeed Sid Yates. "Why Carrol? Joravsky asked. "Because that campaign asked me." He came away from that campaign with a fairly negative view of politics. "Politics was not that cool." He had experience, though, and went on to support Bernie Sanders (independent Congressman, and currently Senator, from Vermont) and later Ned Lamont (the man who defeated Lieberman for the Democratic nomination for Senator from Connecticut and then lost to him in the election). He went from being a campaigner to being
a columnist and author.

The meeting was in Loyola University's Simpson Multi-Purpose Room.

[Note: To learn more about David Sirota and The Uprising go to http://www.davidsirota.com/]

Tags:
Location: Chicago, IL 60640

Discuss
 

Show: Expand All Reply

+0 Rating
Sharon_christmas_angel_119_tinythumb

- Sirota rejects waiting for the ideal politician to be elected to a position from which he can solve our problems. He thinks that the proposed solutions have to come from below with enough pressure to make their passage politically profitable.

By Phil Specht on Jul 3, 2008 12:02 PM EDT

of course don't try to post "proposed solutions" here because they will be "disappeared" and banned to the water cooler

+2 Rating
268t261694

- video fo David Sirota - at Oakland Democracy for America -

By Edwin Rutsch on Jul 3, 2008 2:02 PM EDT

here's a video I did of David , 1 hr, +
David Sirota - Oakland Democracy for America - June 11, 2008 Talking about his new book, The Uprising.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2213022981422901231

 

and talking about the ;

  Failed Conservative Values: David Sirota on Economic Darwinism
video David Sirota came and talked about his new book, 'The Uprising' at the Oakland Democracy for America meet-up on June 11, 2008.  During the Q and A, I asked David how conservative values have failed and he talked about the failure of Conservative Economic Darwinism. The full video of his 70 minute talk and slideshow is now online.

View @: Democracyforamerica.com -  Opednews.com - Dailykos.com

+0 Rating
Hs-2008_tinythumb

- Thanks!

By Sandra Verthein on Jul 3, 2008 5:46 PM EDT

Thanks for posting this link!

+0 Rating
Charlie_in_vermont_tinythumb

- Solutions sound pretty on topic to me

By Charles Chamberlain on Jul 3, 2008 9:04 PM EDT
+2 Rating
Heyhey_tinythumb

-

By puddle on Jul 3, 2008 2:29 PM EDT

Again, change comes from below; only when the people are convinced will the leaders follow.

+0 Rating
Sample_tinythumb

-

By FormerT on Jul 3, 2008 3:23 PM EDT

Sirota rejects waiting for the ideal politician to be elected to a position from which he can solve our problems. He thinks that the proposed solutions have to come from below with enough pressure to make their passage politically profitable.
…………
Sirota compared the relation of politicians to laws to that of corporations. Corporations are in the business of maximizing profits. They will do anything that they can do to make money. The answer is not to ask that they improve their ethics; the answer is for government and laws to regulate what they can do. Similarly, we don't need more ethical politicians. We need laws that restrict what they can do and punish transgression. Among the lws that he mentioned are more restrictions on campaign finances
------------------------

Some confusions at least going in the right (left? lol) - CORRECT direction.
Thanks god it’s becoming transparent even obvious that “solutions have to come from below with enough pressure”…., bravo Mr. Sirota!

However just half step further he is falling back from reality into the dream world: “to make their passage politically profitable”???

In which World politicians’ self-distraction might be “politically profitable”?
In which World politicians will promote laws that will restrict their own power?

The same as for very many, the original Sirota’s confusion, imo, IS differentiation of “corporations” from “government” (that makes laws) and from “politicians” (that make Government); his inability to recognize fact that they all are derived from and fed by each other. They all are intertwined, interchanged and inseparable. They all are in the same business of saving status-quo, NOT changing it (except cosmetically).

To think that someone will voluntarily act AGAINST own INTERESTS is a DREAM!

Good try though, Mr. Sirota.

+0 Rating
Hs-2008_tinythumb

- politically profitable

By Sandra Verthein on Jul 3, 2008 5:45 PM EDT

By "politically profitable" he basically means that they will get more political benefit by agreeing to whatever it is you are demanding than they will by resisting it.  I agree that people will not act against their own interests -- the key is making it *in their own best interest* to do whatever it is you want.  Sirota's point was that one way to do that is to threaten them electorally, because above all an elected official wants to *stay in office.*  If they know that your group has enough power that in the next election you can run someone against them who could actually defeat them, suddenly whatever it is you want *will* be in their best interest.

We can talk about solutions coming from the bottom, but the people at the bottom have to have a way to make those in power implement those solutions, and an electoral challenge is one way to do that.

Add your comment

(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)

Post closed to commenting
star My DFA
star Members
star Groups
star Events
star Candidates

Countdown to Victory

DFA Wireless

Blog for America

Recommended Blog Posts

Recent Blog Posts

The Watercooler