Video Player by Kaltura

 

< Previous Idea from Howard

Howard Zinn on Race in America

Next Idea from Howard >

Howard Zinn on Democracy in America

Spreading good ideas with someone you know is one of the simplest things we can do to improve the conversation.

  •  BUZZ
  • Delicious  DELICIOUS
  •  DIGG
  •  FACEBOOK
  •  LINKEDIN
  • Email_icon  EMAIL

Spreading good ideas with someone you know is one of the simplest things we can do to improve the conversation.

  • Asa Pillsbury replied on 12:26 PM on May 22, 2008
    I agree with almost all of this but I'm very disappointed that Howard Zinn thinks he's forced to vote for a corporate-owned candidate. It seems to me that someone like Zinn should be aware of the importance of third-party candidates. If you think a politician's policies are bad, to vote for them is to support their bad policies.
  • Asa Pillsbury replied on 04:26 PM on May 22, 2008
    I agree with almost all of this but I'm very disappointed that Howard Zinn thinks he's forced to vote for a corporate-owned candidate. It seems to me that someone like Zinn should be aware of the importance of third-party candidates. If you think a politician's policies are bad, to vote for them is to support their bad policies.
  • Pat Pickren replied on 07:37 PM on May 31, 2008
    I found it interesting what he said about Obama having the support of so many young people and if he is elected those same young ones may force him to hold to what our democracy is supposed to be and do. That is my sincere hope - that the young people will stand up against what is happening in our country better than we 40 generation are doing.
  • Pat Pickren replied on 11:37 PM on May 31, 2008
    I found it interesting what he said about Obama having the support of so many young people and if he is elected those same young ones may force him to hold to what our democracy is supposed to be and do. That is my sincere hope - that the young people will stand up against what is happening in our country better than we 40 generation are doing.
  • kida kida
    kida kida replied on 05:39 PM on June 21, 2008
    I think what Zinn is trying to say is that you have to choose between someone who may stay in Iraq and extend the war to Iran (McCain) or someone who has opposed the war since the very beginning and wants to pull out (Obama). Obviously the second option means, at least a priori, less victims. I am sure Zinn supports Nader way more than the other establishment-candidates, but then it all comes down to being realistic and acknowledging the fact that the next president is going to be either a Democrat or a Republican. If you live in a safe state, you cast your ballot for whoever you want cause it's not going to alter the final result. However, if you live in a swing state, you have to realize that if you don't cast your vote to prevent the worse candidate (McCain) from reaching office, you are actually helping him. Since the differences between Obama and McCain, given the magnitude of the power of the U.S., may range in the tens of thousands of victims (just talking about war here), your vote in a swing state should go to Obama, even if he is not your preferred option. Sad but true. P.S. I also think he is quite right pointing out that Obama will be accountable to a much more decent electorate than McCain is.
  • kida kida
    kida kida replied on 09:39 PM on June 21, 2008
    I think what Zinn is trying to say is that you have to choose between someone who may stay in Iraq and extend the war to Iran (McCain) or someone who has opposed the war since the very beginning and wants to pull out (Obama). Obviously the second option means, at least a priori, less victims.

    I am sure Zinn supports Nader way more than the other establishment-candidates, but then it all comes down to being realistic and acknowledging the fact that the next president is going to be either a Democrat or a Republican. If you live in a safe state, you cast your ballot for whoever you want cause it's not going to alter the final result. However, if you live in a swing state, you have to realize that if you don't cast your vote to prevent the worse candidate (McCain) from reaching office, you are actually helping him. Since the differences between Obama and McCain, given the magnitude of the power of the U.S., may range in the tens of thousands of victims (just talking about war here), your vote in a swing state should go to Obama, even if he is not your preferred option. Sad but true.


    P.S. I also think he is quite right pointing out that Obama will be accountable to a much more decent electorate than McCain is.
  • Jamie Tyroler
    Jamie Tyroler replied on 09:54 PM on July 23, 2008
    KidA - I think it's presumptuous to make the claim that Zinn would support Nader. We live in a nation that, with some exceptions, makes it very difficult for someone who isn't a Democrat or Republican to be elected to public office. We have multiple parties ranging from fascists to socialists, communists, and anarchists, but the establishment parties have put up roadblocks for those other parties. Out political system isn't as representative as we are led to believe. Probably the closest elected official I have is my city councilwoman, in terms of number of people represented. She represents probably around 85,000 people. In some nations there might be one or two levels of government below her, to where they are representing perhaps 100 or so people - people who are going to have an easier time expressing their views to those officials. Another problem with our election system is the amount of money that seems to be required to be competitive. How many hundreds of millions of dollars are McCain and Obama going to spend on this election cycle? How many people could be fed or housed for that kind of money? Instead, how much money is going to the bank accounts of the very few professional campaign managers?
  • Jamie Tyroler
    Jamie Tyroler replied on 01:54 AM on July 24, 2008
    KidA - I think it's presumptuous to make the claim that Zinn would support Nader.

    We live in a nation that, with some exceptions, makes it very difficult for someone who isn't a Democrat or Republican to be elected to public office. We have multiple parties ranging from fascists to socialists, communists, and anarchists, but the establishment parties have put up roadblocks for those other parties.

    Out political system isn't as representative as we are led to believe. Probably the closest elected official I have is my city councilwoman, in terms of number of people represented. She represents probably around 85,000 people. In some nations there might be one or two levels of government below her, to where they are representing perhaps 100 or so people - people who are going to have an easier time expressing their views to those officials.

    Another problem with our election system is the amount of money that seems to be required to be competitive. How many hundreds of millions of dollars are McCain and Obama going to spend on this election cycle? How many people could be fed or housed for that kind of money? Instead, how much money is going to the bank accounts of the very few professional campaign managers?

Sign up or log in to post a response to this idea.