What the Free Press has to say about Kamala Harris, today (8/10/24).

1. 87

   tsmogposted 4 weeks ago

   The Free Press newsletter on Saturday, Aug 10, presented a short synopsis of where we are at with Kamala Harris as the target. No matter if you read the less than 1,000 word article or not give attention to this paragraph.
   
   "Mirek concludes that all political parties “shout that they want to shape a better future, but it’s not true. The future is only an indifferent void no one cares about, but the past is filled with life, and its countenance is irritating, repellent, wounding, to the point that we want to destroy or repaint it. We want to be masters of the future only for the power to change the past.”
   
   True?
   False?
   Undecided?
   
   Commentary or thoughts?
   
   **********
   
   The full article is;
   
   Kamala Harris and the Election of Laughter and Forgetting
   The surreal fiction of Czech dissident Milan Kundera can help us understand our own truth-bending politics, argues Eli Lake.
   https://www.thefp.com/p/kamala-harris-a … open=false
   
   About the Free Press . . .
   
   The Free Press is a new media company founded by Bari Weiss and built on the ideals that once were the bedrock of great journalism: honesty, doggedness, and fierce independence. We publish investigative stories and provocative commentary about the world as it actually is—with the quality once expected from the legacy press, but the fearlessness of the new.
   
   Originally called Common Sense, we focus on stories that are ignored or misconstrued in the service of an ideological narrative. For us, curiosity isn’t a liability. It’s a necessity.
   
   Expect debates, scoops from trusted reporters, provocations from those thinking outside the lines, and live events that bring people with different views together into a truly diverse community.
   
   You won’t agree with everything we run. And we think that’s exactly the point.
   
   A free press for free people.
   
   https://www.thefp.com/?gad_source=1& … gImmfD_BwE
   
   AllSides places them at Center for their media bias rating.
   
   Another interesting article with a different perspective on Waltz is . . .
   
   How Did Walz Win Kamala’s Veepstakes? by the Free Press (Aug 6, 2024)
   The Minnesota governor is a folksy progressive and a good soldier. And Josh Shapiro may be too ambitious to accept second place, reports Salena Zito.
   https://www.thefp.com/p/what-made-kamala-snub-shapiro

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Great article, the author Eli Lake used pure common sense while writing that piece.  Loved it.  I also really appreciate "The Free Press"
      
      Mirek's view appeared quite pessimistic and I could challenge him on several points. He argues that all political parties claim to care about the future, but really they don't; they only focus on the past. However, this is a broad and unfair generalization. I mean, some political movements genuinely work towards improving the future, like those fighting for civil rights or climate change action.
      
      Mirek also says the future is an "indifferent void," meaning it doesn't matter or affect anyone, while the past is full of life and emotions that can be painful. He suggests that people only want to control the future so they can change the past. While  I feel it's true that some may try to rewrite history to fit their narrative, most political efforts are genuinely about making a better future based on lessons learned from the past, not just obsessing over it.
      
      Is Mirek's view too cynical? It Doesn't seem to recognize the true efforts some people make to create a better future.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Credence2posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

         Welcome back....

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            Thank you, I hope you are enjoying your summer. It has certainly been one we will forget soon. LOL

            replyreport
      2. 87

         tsmogposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

         Wow . . . Welcome Back! I am honored you chose to re-enter the fray with this OP post. Seeing your post my mind flashed on 'Around the World in Eighty Days' by Jules Verne. I imagined you were in Mexico or traveling.
         
         As a stand alone statement I lean toward your view of the paragraph written by Kundera. I would agree cynicism may be apparent. With the context of the Free Press article I can see how it is explanatory to the point Lake was making with Harris, her past, recent events, and the unknown future.
         
         I also thought about it in the context to the dispute about how to write Black history relational to slavery and who gets to write it. I pondered what college text books are for German history during the period of say 1900 - 1950 at the university level not only for Germany, but Europe.
         
         I may one day seek out Kundera's book, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. The title alone I find intriguing. Other titles of his look interesting as well. I bet his perspective from living in a communist held nation would be enlightening.
         
         Reviews for The Book of Laughter and Forgetting.
         
         Reviews
         
         "The Book of Laughter and Forgetting calls itself a novel, although it is part fairy tale, part literary criticism, part political tract, part musicology, and part autobiography. It can call itself whatever it wants to, because the whole is genius." -- New York Times
         
         "This book, as it bluntly calls itself, is brilliant and original, written with the purity and wit that invite us directly in." -- John Updike
         
         "A masterpiece." -- Salman Rushdie
         
         "An absolutely dazzling entertainment. . . . Arousing on every level--political, erotic, intellectual, and above all, humorous." -- Newsweek
         Culture
         
         https://bookshop.org/p/books/the-book-o … 0060932145

         replyreport
         1. 71

            Ken Burgessposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            Then you may find this interesting:
            The Book of Laughter and Forgetting by Milan Kundera (from Livestream #56)
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQwg7-Kccnc

            replyreport
            1. 87

               tsmogposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

               Thanks, Ken. I'll look/watch it tonight sometime.

               replyreport
         2. 85

            Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            "I did some research on The Book of Laughter and Forgetting and Milan Kundera. Although I haven't read the book or delved into Kundera's work before, I find his background quite intriguing. Now, I'm about to share some thoughts based on this limited knowledge—just for the sake of conversation. LOL.
            
            Milan Kundera's The Book of Laughter and Forgetting is indeed labeled as a novel, but from the paragraph, you offered up ---  the author works to blur the lines between fiction, memoir, and political commentary does he not?  Using Merik to share his views possibly.   By presenting it as a novel, Kundera could have well sought to gain the creative freedom to explore complex and sensitive topics—such as political issues—without being constrained by the expectations or limitations of other literary forms.
            Labeling the book as a novel could have served as a protective mechanism, in my view. During the time Kundera was writing, he was known to be living in exile from Czechoslovakia,  having been expelled from the Communist Party, and his work was banned in his homeland. By framing his deeply personal and politically charged reflections within the structure of a novel, Kundera was able to distance himself from the direct consequences that might arise from more overtly political or autobiographical writing.
            
            In this way, the novel designation allowed Kundera to express his true views and beliefs about life and politics while shielding him from the potential "fodder" that could have come with a more straightforward critique. The label "novel" provided a form of artistic license, granting him the freedom to offer personal experience, and philosophical musings, without risk of being pigeonholed or censored. 
            
            Now I am hooked and will need to visit Amazon and buy the book.
            
            I couldn't resist jumping into your thread—it's just too interesting! I spent June in Mexico, and my summer has been a break from chatting. I was banned for a bit here, so I spent some time on Truth Social. I kept an eye on Hubpages, but I knew sharing my true views might get me banned again. I have to admit, I can get overly passionate about my opinions, which isn’t always the best. With everything that’s been happening, I felt I needed a true rest from it all. LOL. But I’ve always enjoyed your posts; they’re always thought-provoking and make for great conversation.

            replyreport
      3. 71

         Ken Burgessposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

         The goal is to maintain power and control. 
         
         For those power brokers within the Party and for those of the Donor class that fund (and guide) the Party.
         
         They focus on the past to use it to label, attack, and stir fear in the voting populace. 
         
         The Party does not care about the past, the facts, fairness or justice.  They shape the narrative to make themselves the good guys and who-ever or whatever opposes is transformed to the biggest evil, the biggest threat, etc.
         
         To believe in or associate with a Party is to adhere to a faith or ideology.
         
         This includes Democrats and Republicans.
         
         To be Independent is to not belong to any Party any ideology as if it were a faith, as if it is necessary to believe in it regardless of what your eyes and ears tell you, despite what your heart or mind may say in protest.
         
         To be Independent is to weigh all the facts and determine who you believe is better for the current situation and times we are in as a Nation, what is best for America, its citizens and its future.
         
         To be beholden to an ideology is to automatically disqualify anyone who opposes the Party, regardless of what you thought about them BEFORE they stood against the Party.
         
         An Independent will look at a situation like Tulsi Gabbard leaving the Democrats and raising an alarm against what is going on in the Party and want to understand the WHY behind it.
         
         Just one example... it should be applied to others who were once supporters of the Party, like Elon Musk and Isaiah Washington, the price of their raising the alarm is steep for them.  The least you can do is open your mind enough to ask why they would do that?

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Sharlee01posted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

            I completely agree with the sentiment you've expressed. I  agree that pursuing power and control often drives the actions of those within political parties and the influential donor class behind them.   They manipulate the past and shape narratives to maintain their hold on power, often at the expense of truth, fairness, and justice. By vilifying opposition and demanding unwavering loyalty, they turn political affiliation into a kind of faith or ideology, that some will follow fervently.
            
            This phenomenon is not unique to any one party—both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of it. To be truly Independent means to rise above this, to evaluate situations and individuals based on facts and reason rather than blind allegiance. It’s about making informed decisions for the betterment of the nation and its future, not just following a party line.
            
            The examples of Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, and Isaiah Washington underscore the consequences of breaking from the party's narrative. Their willingness to speak out, despite the personal and professional costs, should prompt us to ask why. It’s crucial to keep an open mind and seek to understand the reasons behind such decisions, rather than dismissing them out of hand. This approach is essential if we hope to foster a more thoughtful and independent electorate.

            replyreport