portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

corporate dominance | government

Nirvana's Novoselic reveals he's a sellout to the status quo!

Krist Novoselic (former bassist of Nirvana) appeared at a book signing last night at Powells on Burnside to speak of needed electoral reforms and his new book. But it didn't take long for Chris to reveal his true allegiance, to be a shrill for the Democratic party.
Krist Novoselic (former bassist of Nirvana) appeared at a book signing last night at Powell's on Burnside to speak of needed electoral reforms and his new book "Of Grunge & Government: Let's Fix this Broken Democracy!" But it didn't take long for Chris to reveal his true allegiance, which was to be a shrill for the Democratic party.

Being a long time Nirvana fan (largely because they rejected everything corporate and did things the way they wanted to, rather than following the usual formula for monetary success in the music world),
I was very happy to hear that one of my all-time favorite bands had someone who was advocating the type of electoral reforms that I see as being necessary if recapturing representative government will ever be possible in the "current bought and sold duopoly" that now reigns supreme in the United States.

Krist began his talk by talking about his upbringing and how music introduced him to a whole new way of approaching the world. He advocated the need for instant runoff voting and proportional representation and went on to provide a plan for implementing these reforms through the creation of "super districts". He compared our Democratic framework to the hardware of a computer system and our electoral system to an "operating system" and went on to say that while our CPU is just fine, but we are using a operating system that can only be compared to 1980's DOS.
But then a very strange thing happened.

Krist began to stump for John Kerry.
The usual predictable preaching of "voting for your fears" instead of with your conscience, was followed by more fear mongering about how third parties were responsible for putting Bush in office.

It didn't make sense to me, because here you have a man who understands the need for instant runoff voting and major sweeping electoral reforms, but who is now advocating we maintain the very status quo that he claims these electoral reforms are designed to address???

During the Q&A that followed, I challenged him directly about why he aligns himself with a party that has done everything to block the electoral reforms he advocates, but he seemed taken aback and somewhat confused.
As he struggled to answer my challenge, more people in the audience began to challenge his call to support the duopoly and he began to unravel.
It became obvious that Krist (while good intentioned) was in way over his head on a subject he did not know very much about. He became emotional and told one lady that she better be prepared to lose her right to an abortion!
People began to walk out.

I was very disappointed and felt like I had been lured to this book signing under the guise of creating and forcing much needed change, but was awoken to the same ol tired rhetoric about the need to vote for the lesser of two evils.

Somehow I think Kurt would be turning over in his grave!
What in the Hell 20.Sep.2004 08:59

Justin

are you talking about? Nirvana was a corporate band, and signed to a major label (Geffen, I think it was) after bailing on sub-pop. There was nothing revolutionary or even progressive about Cobain or his band. They may have made the music they wanted to, but they only released what Geffen allowed them to--that's the nature of the corporate music business. I'm sorry you were disappoited by Krist, but if you'd been paying attention, you wouldn't have been so shocked and appalled!

Besides--Kurt wouldn't have cared. The only thing he cared about was his next fix. Revolutionary indeed.

You don't know much about Nirvana Justin! 20.Sep.2004 09:29

StevetheGreen

It was Nirvana's unprecedented growth in a very small window of time that escalated them into the corporate world kicking and screaming the entire way.

Once alternative becomes popular, it doesn't lose it's meaning, only it's lable.
Kurt Cobain resented the fame and the fortune that so many other rock bands crave.
If you knew anything about Nirvana beyond what MTV told you to think, you would give Kurt more credit than you have.

His eventual suicide was more a result of himself hating what they had become than it was any addiction to drugs. Which by the way, also seems to have escaped your ability to comprehend.

If Kurt was a sellout, the last thing he would of done would of been what he did.
Furthermore, if personal demons and internal pain are something foreign to you (which by your comments they obviously are), then perhaps you should give more thought to replies that lack any form of compassion and are more representative of the corporate mindset that you claim to abhore!

boohoo I'm rich 20.Sep.2004 10:50

approx

We're supposed to cut a junkie some slack b/c he was rich and famous. Gimme a break Steve. No one forced these dudes to sign a major label...they got what was coming to them. I seriously doubt they were very principled people (that drummer's new really famous band). Stumping for Kerry is hardly a progressive cause; although I have no problem with it. I think we should respect him for getting people out to vote, but famous people have an obligation to do such things anyway.

novoselic was indeed turbo 20.Sep.2004 10:54

empire slayer

i too was surprised by the extent of novoselic's promotion of john kerry. when one woman mentioned voting for nader, novoselic got very agitated and upset. the whole room was tense and full of chatter. that was the most interesting moment of the night, to once again view the anger that the democrat supporters have towards 3rd party supporters, especially nader. i also voted for nader in 2000, but will not vote for him in 2004 because i just don't understand what he is trying to accomplish. but i doubt i will vote for kerry because he is such a lukewarm establishment drone. theory aside, i do honestly think that full blown facism is less likely under kerry. but the "selection" of 2004 is mostly irrelevant to me because the roots of the problems we face will never be addressed by any entrenched politician--it is up to us as it has ALWAYS been. november 2nd will come and go, and we will still be staring down the loaded barrel of the end of oil, global warming, environmental destruction, deforestation, overpopulation, corporate globalization, economic instability... until a critical mass of people gets past their denial and wakes up to the crushing problems facing this planet, we will continue to be distracted by the false choices that those in power prepare for us, and we will continue to lose precious time. do we even have the will to act, to make the truly difficult choices for our future? not choosing is a choice, but don't be surprised if you don't like the consequences...

, 20.Sep.2004 10:57

,

kurt hated cops even when he was a little boy.thats enough for me.btw if you are a political street musician in bellingham wa. ,you could be punched bloody by a frat boy type and the police will protect the guy who assaulted you.

some of kurt's lyrics 20.Sep.2004 11:00

a Nirvana fan

i remember listening to this song, off of "In Utero", which came out after Nirvana had become huge stars. the song starts with a guitar riff that mimics the opening from "Smells Like Teen Spirit", teasing the listener. the lyrics reveal Kurt's feelings about fame. in the context of this article, they can also be used as a comment on Kerry and the Democrats and how they treat progressive/liberal voters. if you haven't heard this song in a while (or at all), i suggest finding it and giving it a listen. it's a powerful piece, angry and honest and bitter and loud.

"Rape Me"

Rape me,
Rape me my friend
Rape me,
Rape me again

I'm not the only one

Hate me,
Do it and do it again.
Waste me,
Rape me my friend.

I'm not the only one

My favorite inside source
I'll kiss your open sores
Appreciate your concern
You'll always stink and burn

Rape me,
Rape me my friend
Rape me,
Rape me again

I'm not the only one

Rape me...


pshaw 20.Sep.2004 12:09

Justin

Kicking and screaming, eh? Um, yeah. Think his hand was shaking when he signed the deal with Geffen and endorsed his checks? Well, you certainly learned me.

And, as for the personal pain/demon dig, you can fuck right off. I've spent more desperate hours trying to think of one fucking reason why I shouldn't die than you've spent mentally masturbating about Kurt's alleged relevance. How many times, I wonder, have you ordered someone to get rid of your kitchen knives because you don't know what you're going to do next?

Asshole.

Must be nice, J 20.Sep.2004 12:35

...

Oh, Justin,

I'm surprised a fourteen yr. old like yourself would even know about Portland Indy Media.
Maybe in a few years you'll learn to articulate yourself , and not feel like you have to be vulgar and demeaning to make your point.

But it's so cute to hear the little ones get all huffy, isn't it?

chump 20.Sep.2004 13:21

alexander t.

You're upset over the political opinions of a bass player in a rock band? get a life.

chump! 20.Sep.2004 13:30

young impressionable mind

Bass player, movie star, football player, or whatever, when people have a "name" they are given a voice regardless of whether they know what they are talking about.

If those people use that voice and don't know what they are talking about, they can affect people's views in a way that is not productive toward goals of a different kind of future.

Sounds like that is what Novoselic did.

At the very least he needed to identify his book signing about fixing our democracy as the Democrat stump speech that it was.

hero 20.Sep.2004 13:49

shaun

kurt was a hero and a pioneer and he and his band deserve respect for all the light and beuty they brought into the world if he hadn't of died i would have joined his revolution but i was too young than

villiage idiot 20.Sep.2004 13:50

noidarchist

somewhere in the NW, a villiage is missing it's idiot!!!!

Ranks right up there... 20.Sep.2004 14:46

@

...with Bob Weir playing at the Bohemian Club.

The elite work for themselves.
Not you.
Never forget that.

shrill? 20.Sep.2004 14:52

almostpunk almostpunk@hotmail.com

I think you mean shill.

2 choices 20.Sep.2004 15:56

Mike

There are only two choices in this upcoming election, Kerry or Bush. A third party has no chance of winning. Support the third parties whenever possible, but not during this presidential election! In this election, a vote for a third party is a vote for Bush,
and Bush = Corporate Power.

Kerry is also a puppet for the corporations, but the people will have more power if Kerry is in office.

A vote for Kerry is a symbolic one 20.Sep.2004 17:26

approx

Although I am scared enough to consider it, I often wonder if the two parties are so closely related what is the purpose of voting for that so called democrat. The meta-policies of Bush and Kerry are more similiar than they are different concerning the war in Iraq (escalation), Palestine (militaristic zionism), the prison industrial complex, health care, globalization, etc. I must submit then to Mike that a vote for a third party is actually the only vote that matters practically. To be sure, Liberals are more upset with what Bush represents than his actual policies. This must be true b/c of how closely related the policies are. It seems rather evident, then, that a vote for Kerry is really nothing more than a vote of symbolism and will have very little practical effect. Problematically, this is the liberal argument against voting for conscience. Is anyone else feeling this?

Bunch of Frickin Morons! 20.Sep.2004 18:09

Anarchy-nonymous

I sped read through Novoselic's book and he basically stated that supporting Kerry in a two party system was a step in the right direction. Anybody who seriously believes that Kerry and Bush are one and the same has his head stuck so far up his ass, he needs to take a big bite of his/her own shit and spare the rest of us. Democrats do not own a Fox News network. Democrats never conspired to with conservative Supreme Court justices to exercise power the Constitution does not give them and take away a State's right to decide a recount of a Presidential election. Democrats have never so blatantly lied their way into office and so arrogantly broke those promises after getting in the White House. Democrats have never lied the US in a preemptive war without end. Are Democrats saints who are uninfluenced by corporate money? Of course not.

Then Novoselic uses his freedom of speech and fame to try to speak his mind and you give him this crap? Why don't you shelf you adolescent fantasies about indie rock and THINK about what he's saying. You don't have to ultimately agree, but the point he makes is valid.

And one more thing to the Greens... Ralph Nader is a secretive, union-busting, big corporation stockholder who spends all his time bashing Kerry and pitching softballs at Bush. Why doesn't he talk about Barrick Gold Mines, Harken Oil, Enron, or anything that directly implicates Bush? You were all tricked by a big disinformation stunt organized by the protege of the Imperialist Dulles brothers, GHW Bush, in 2000. Take another bite, Shit Heads.

apparently 20.Sep.2004 18:19

.

You slept through the Clinton years when far more civilians were being killed in other countries than under Jr.

BTW, Nader is calling for Bush to be impeached. What has John Kerry said recently besides "I was fooled by a moron."

one more thing 20.Sep.2004 18:24

.

Nader isn't the Green party candidate this year, Cobb is. Maybe you should actually pay attention to the election if you're going to rant about it.

after all these years... 20.Sep.2004 18:57

nomorerockstars

After all these decades, haven't you learned that the radical left adoption of the rock star image has been a complete failure? More often than not, all the stardom does is allow some loser to play out his or her infantile fantasies, indulge their drug addictions, and pump up their egos. I want less bullshit posturing and more real action! Cobain was an idiot and a junkie. I'm glad he's dead. Why are you suprised when his old bassist turns out to be a bumbling bourgeouis pimp? Duh.

right on daddi o 20.Sep.2004 19:24

irrelevant

right on daddi o question is the way to go always say no to the status quo hoe! thanks for not giving benefit of doubt to those perceivably in the know.

smells like PC shit 20.Sep.2004 20:39

lydia quince

everyone has a right to their opinions and beliefs
unpopular or not...

vote.


let democrazy ring true...turn out in record numbers...

fuck democracy if people cannot make up their own minds without some fucker influencing their opinions or beliefs...

this country has a dark history...

let's bring evil mother fuckers to light

Clinton Years 20.Sep.2004 21:38

Anarchy-nonymous

More civilians died under the Clinton years? Huh? Do give specifics, as I went out of the way to give some. I'll give you some more...

Clinton interfered in Bosnia and Haiti to prevent genocide. Clinton was stuck with Somalia after the Bush administration's last minute, half-assed "Operation Restore Hope." After the Haiti intervention, President Aristide was installed. One of the first things Bush did was support a coup against him. No major wars were launched under Clinton. Bush started pushing for war in Iraq as soon as he got into office! He got it.

And on the subject of Nader, regardless of whether or not he's called for Bush's impeachment (I have not read that, but I'll take your word for it), he stopped all efforts on the part of his own employees to unionize. He rarely gets into specifics in his denouncement of Corporate America, but spends lots of time railing against Democrats. His myth about living in an apartment has been proven false. He lives in a mansion under the title of his brother, and his 2000 disclosure to stay in the race revealed he had a huge porfolio of stocks in companies like Enron, worth millions. He is an agent provacateur. If you don't believe me, search the internet. The information is out there and credibly documented.

Finally... NIRVANA. A ground breaking band to be sure, but to suggest they went "kicking and screaming" along with major label success is a complete farce. Their management company signed them at the same time as a popular Oregon butt-rock band. They went to LA and started work on Nevermind. As Johnny Rotten used to say, "If you don't like being a rock star, just stop. It's the easiest thing in the world to do. Stop." His point was, nobody is forced to be a rock star.

And anybody halfway honest with themself has to admit that In Utero was bombing on the chart, relative to the success of Nevermind, until Kurt was either murdered or committed suicide (I won't get into that one). Suddenly he was the great martyr of the grunge movement (that's how the record company sold it) and all the dim bulb Kurt wanna-be's ate it up. Suddenly Nirvana was a legend. If Kurt had lived, Nirvana would be the subject of VH-1 "one hit wonder" programs.

gotta love 20.Sep.2004 22:54

shills like "Anarchy-nonymous"

whose favorite band is Nirvana,

and can't stop talking 'bout how awesome the Democratic-corporate party agenda is . . .

if you don't like being a shill, "Anarchy-nonymous", just stop.

no matter who you vote for, you still get SKULL & BONES

Who's the shill? 20.Sep.2004 23:14

We know it's you

When your answer to everything is skull and bones, you lure the unsuspecting away from the vote. And who are you luring away? Only potential Kerry voters. Potential Bush voters wouldn't be swayed by that conspiracy crap.

"Skull and Bones," --- an easy catchphrase complete with bogey-man like illustration. All they have to do is remember the phrase and the image, and they know what to do, right?

Congratulations, just like Bush, you are a leader of morons.

wrong 20.Sep.2004 23:18

thanks for playing

> Being a long time Nirvana fan (largely because they rejected everything
> corporate and did things the way they wanted to, rather than following the
> usual formula for monetary success in the music world)

Nirvana always wanted to have it both ways. They wanted to be Sonic Youth or R.E.M. and have the iHateEverything kids in Olympia love them anyway. The author of this article just doesn't know what he's talking about.

"shill"?? 20.Sep.2004 23:54

evidence, please

"When your answer to everything is skull and bones, you lure the unsuspecting away from the vote."

--no one's "answer to everything" is "skull and bones", but the fact remains that in the 2004 pResidential Selection, a Skull & Bones member **will** be the next president - no matter how the vote for that office is cast or 'counted'.

as far as the so-called "unsuspecting" - 50% of America does not bother to cast votes for any elected office or motion (pResidency or not) -

and the alternative is always: Nader, Green, Socialist, etc.

"And who are you luring away? Only potential Kerry voters. Potential Bush voters wouldn't be swayed by that conspiracy crap."

--not the slightest idea of what you're blabbering about here . . . "luring away"??!?? from what - to what?? the current officeholder in the White House was APPOINTED, not elected. "conspiracy crap" . . . you mean, like the WMDs that John Kerry innocently believed Saddam had according to what Colin Powell told him in 2002 (and which C.P. now contradicts)? or perhaps you'd be referring to the electronic voting machines, the military absentee vote, or Dick Cheney and Antonin Scalia?

""Skull and Bones," --- an easy catchphrase complete with bogey-man like illustration. All they have to do is remember the phrase and the image, and they know what to do, right?"

--wake up and smell the reality:  http://www.prisonplanet.com/010104kerryadmits.html

"Congratulations, just like Bush, you are a leader of morons."

--I'm a leader of nothing, and you're the moron. (speaking of which, your implication above is that Americans in general are morons - surely you don't believe that Kerry voters are so?) Go back and bury your head in the sand where it belongs.

Clinton, genocidal war criminal 21.Sep.2004 00:46

impeachment is too good for these people

1992-2000, Iraq, 1.5 million dead as a direct result of US policy.

5000 children under the age of 5 dying every month, the price was worth it said Madeline Albright.

Meanwhile Nader offers the only real critique of the Bush administration, which might be louder if the democrats weren't doing their best to subvert our democracy in their attacks on him. If the democratic leadership were smart or willing, they would have let him run his campaign, let him attack Bush, draw large numbers of republicans, and help Kerry win the election. It's a good thing for Bush that they are either not smart enough or not willing to win.

As the democrats continue to fight Nader instead of Bush, they will succeed in beating Nader and losing to Bush (as is obvious to anyone paying attention).

Would the democrats uphold democratic principles in order to win an election... it is looking doubtful but not yet impossible.

Well at least I got you talking 21.Sep.2004 01:03

about something other than Skull and Bones

That other stuff you mentioned is actually significant.

Not the skull and bones stuff though. It's not a bombshell that Kerry would "admit" to be a skull and boner. He'd better admit it. It's a matter of record. It's not a crime. It's a fraternity.

The same ol fear rhetoric from supporters of the status quo! 21.Sep.2004 07:41

StevetheGreen

Without strawmen, the sellers of fear here would be left with nothing but the same predictable lesser of two evils nonsense that has consistantly proven to be a failure and is largely responsible for why we find ourselves in the current mess we are in as human beings.

Why not argue what has been written versus what you would prefer to argue against?
Could it be because your arguement breaks down under any kind of real examination?

Let's dissect the nonsense point by point.
Point 1 to the uninformed mainstream media parrot: Nader is not a Green, never has been a Green, and is not the Green party nominee.
(apologies to everyone else who had to endure that obvious point, but apparently some of us don't read)

Second point to the creators of strawmen, no informed person has ever claimed there is no difference between the parties.
What has been claimed (and is easily shown to be true with a momentary stop at the library) is that there is not a significant difference on the issues that matter most.
I.E: US imperialism to maintain empire, globilization, civil liberties, or creating the necessary environmental protections.
We have arrived at a point in human history where anything else is just window dressing and can not be compared to the places where the fascist and the corporate sellout actually are different.
Pretending otherwise is the real dillusion.

Third point for those who advocate "taking a step in the right direction": Don't buy into the corporate manifested efforts to placate you by voting out frick and voting in frack with the belief that what needs to change will change.

Forth point: As far as what proven failures exist, once again! A cursory checking of the facts will liberate your false assumptions. What has proven to be a failure is voting for the lesser of two evils.

Finally! We don't have time for you well intended attempts at slow methodical incremental change or steps in the right direction. Jesus Christ people! Take a look at the world.

We are on the brink of eco-collapse.
Peak oil will only expedite that collapse.

Giving in to your fears has to stop some time and I say that we don't have enough time to continue to vote our fears because the alternative is not as bad. We need to force change now.
We need to be prepared with a working viable vehicle once the economic collapse begins.

GWB should scare the hell out of everyone.
But the real fear should be of the "kinder gentler version" which pretends to be something that it is not.

Thinking of Sucking Back Up To The Democraps? 21.Sep.2004 12:28

@

Stop hitting yourself! You slither back to the Democraps like a battered woman shields her abuser.

Load up on guns and bring your friends, its fun to lose and to pretend... 21.Sep.2004 12:41

Kurt Cobain

I liked Nirvana when i was an angsty 14 year old brat.

"the whole song [smells like teen spirit] is made up of contradictory ideas. its just making fun of the whole idea of having a revolution. It's a nice thought though"
"Nirvana was in a position where it was expected to fight in a revolutionary way towards the corporate machine. A lot of people just told me flat out, 'you can use this as a tool... something that will really change the world.' and i just thought, how dare you put that kind of pressure on me. it's stupid."

Krist Is A Fine American 21.Sep.2004 12:54

Mistletoe Angel

I defend everything he's said here, personally.

I don't care what everyone says. Nirvana's men are going to have to accept they are a corporate band. I have the utmost respect for Kurt Cobain as an artist and as a youthful icon that will live on from generation to generation, but, come on now, you clearly must admit Nirvana is part of the corporate fabric too. They were signed to Geffin, they're clearly no stranger to the fray.

But am I complaining they became part of it? No way. You can strive commerically and still keep your pure identity. Look at R.E.M for example. They were the underground sensation for a decade, only growing more popular each album. I remember many panicked when they announced they were getting a major label deal at Warner Bros, many thought they would sell out. The result: continuing to craft some of te best rock and roll to come out of the past two decades, with "Automatic For The People", a Warner Bros release, arguably their all-time greatest masterpiece.

The Dead came out with their "Wave That Flag" tour, encouraging young men and women to vote. Some may say because they've never really been known for engaging politics with their music in concert, they've sold out somewhat, but their musical identity is fresh as always. "Johnny B. Goode" is the Democratic campaign's main theme song selection, and the Dead played this number constantly on tour.

Who's to say if Kurt Cobain or Jerry Garcia are REALLY turning in their graves because of this? That's unfair to judge. Let us just accept what's happening in the NOW.

Anyway, I am not thrilled of the direction the corporate world is heading, nor the continuing de-regulated climate. But what everyone must understand here is that there is far more at stake then just money. There is our democracy, which is about to get bid to the highest bidders should we not take action and vote for Bush's challenger, John Kerry.

Also, it is unfair to immediately suggest "Rape Me" could be used on the treatment of liberal and progressive voters. That's absurd. That was released in 1993 for crying out loud. That's over a decade ago.

The fact is, as young people often like to do, they tend to imagine WHAT they really want their idols to believe. They admire an artist so much they want their idol to be a carbon copy of ones self. That Nirvana fan who provided the lyrics is just disappointed what Novoselic said and refuses or pretends not to believe what he said. Putting words into someone's mouth always proves to be the most effective way to attempt to make others believe what you yourself believe, when in fact it contrasts to the true belief.

I've read through all your posts here, and clearly all you're using to attack Novoselic is bias opinion and propaganda. Skull and Bones.

Novoselic has made his case, and if you are a true Nirvana maniac, you would have picked up "Of Grunge And Government, Let's Fix This Broken Democracy" and clearly understood Novoselic's position. You're intentionally distorting the reality here, and tha's all I have to say there.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

the lesser of two evils is still an evil 21.Sep.2004 14:02

tothebarricades.tk

For some of you supporting the Democrats, I'd just like to ask: Who was President during most of the Vietnam War? But I suppose that was "in defense" of the country, as John Kerry says. Give me a break. Vote no one.

Nobody is attacking Novoselic Noah! 21.Sep.2004 15:06

StevetheGreen

I have the upmost respect for any musician or other publicly known figure that uses their name to promote ideas for much needed progressive change.
I think it is great when Krist advocates reforming our broken system.

But when those same welll known individuals begin to reveal hypocrisy and back supporting a status quo that has brought us to the precipice of eco-collapse and preach fear about what will happen if we vote our conscience, I will be there to point out the history shows just how flawed their approach is.
I don't care if it was Kurt himself selling the fear.
Ignorance requires education, even for rock gods.

It is obvious to this Nirvana fan that the wrong Democrat has got in Krist's ear and a few days in a "deprogramming room" is probably all he needs to see the light.

Bottom line: You can't advocate fixing our broken democracy by selling us right wing democrats.

gurgle 21.Sep.2004 17:00

gurgle gurgle

Music and poetry don't change the world.

Apparently this is news to somebody.

If "changing the world" and playing music are both important to you, then it sounds like you've got two different hobbies. Nothing wrong with that. But just because they're both things you like doesn't mean they're the same thing.

sorry 21.Sep.2004 17:07

no one is not on the ballot

You can't vote "no one."

"No one" is not on the ballot.

Not voting doesn't send anybody a message. Nonvoters don't vote for all kinds of reasons, and they have all kinds of different opinions about the world, most of which you wouldn't like.

Right Wing Democrats? 21.Sep.2004 17:32

Mistletoe Angel

No, sorry, with all due respect, I don't accept or buy your "selling us right-wing democrats" blurb.

That would be your intuitive argument again anyway. You must then ask yourself what defines a left-wing Democrat. I'm certain you'd hit a barrier there.

We liberals are keen of the necessity in searching for new ideas, reform, and diversity. A majority of these Democrats have charged against the Bush Administration's war, the Patriot Act, the constitutional amendment on banning same sex marriage, etc.

You've got to test the waters to make sure something will work. Toes first, then the ankles, then when you're confident it's working go in waist-deep, then finally relax your neck when all is stable. These Democrats are proposing alternatives and modifications. Be patient, my friend.

Novoselic is where he should be in my opinion. And I'll just leave it at that.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

leadership through focus groups 21.Sep.2004 17:55

just what we need

"You've got to test the waters to make sure something will work."

Yes, that's so much better than having principles and integrity.

"A majority of these Democrats have charged against the Bush Administration's war, the Patriot Act, the constitutional amendment on banning same sex marriage, etc."

Which democrats are you referring to? Not the ones in congress, or leading the democratic party. Most of them support the war, and voted for it, just like they did the Patriot Act, Homeland Security Act, Unborn Victims of Violence Act, and the rest of Bush's policies. And while they might win a lot of republican support by opposing the constitutional amendment on banning same sex marriage they lose progressives by not supporting gay marriage, as Kerry and Edwards have repeatedly stated. It's like the democrats think it's honorable to be running on a "separate but equal" platform. It's disgraceful, and it's disgraceful that democrats put up with this shit from their party which is being run by those who have sought to emulate Reagan and turn the democratic party into the republican party of the 80's. Well, they have won, they got what they wanted, a democratic party that is appealing to republicans and disgusting to those of us who actually believe in the principles of justice and equality.

Counter-Intelligence 21.Sep.2004 23:01

Anarchy-nonymous

Progressives, don't waste your time here. This is just some GOP disinformation blogger out to minimize the influence people like Novoselic have on people. Their argument is not rational nor intelligent. It's just propaganda.

Neocons gradually took control of conservatism in the 60's through 90's by understanding the anatomy of power--organization. They knew they needed to find strength in numbers and hoodwink them through false causes like "right to life", "stop the death tax", and "flag burning amendments." They used these swing vote issues to seize the less-educated party and brainwash it for their own agenda. The most immediate and effective impact progressives, anarchists, Greens, etc., can have on politics is to embrace the Democratic Party this time and stay active and push for progressive cabinet appointees. After Clinton got elected, those of us who were to young to remember getting sodomized by the Reagan/Bush revolution of the 80's just fell asleep... Clinton HAD progressives... Josellyn Elders, a Surgeon General calling for planned parenthood and legalization of drugs, preferring treatment over criminalization. When Republicans pounded Clinton for that, where was the support? You Dem bashers are uneducated, ignorant, puppets for the police state. You're just playing into their hands, and that's what Novoselic was trying to say.

voting is a tactic 21.Sep.2004 23:10

jordan jordan@lclark.edu

I agree with the comments regarding a fucked up political system and the similarities btw republican and democrats, but this is the nature of a country so large. Politicians, if they are to get elected, need to appeal so broadly for support that their statements hardly mean anything. While this sucks, it is the situation we have to work with.

Given this, and given the state of our country, I do not see it offensive or stupid to vote democrat. True, it is appalling that many voted for the patriot act, homeland security, and the war, and this makes me not want to vote for them. But when I consider the situation the world is in and think realistically about the electoral process, I find the only option is democrat. The Democratic party is the only party that can put bush out of office, which is our primary goal here, i believe. since voting is a TACTIC, that is, it is not the only way i make my voice heard, i find it ok to use it as a tactic and not vote idealistically. IF i was incapable of voicing my opinion any other way (which is almost impossible-living is a statement in and of itself) then i would vote idealistically. But it isn't. Voting is a tactic, along with protests, bike riding, eating vegetarian, composting, picking up trash, saying hi to strangers, having conversations with people i agree and disagree with etc. therefore, we should use this TACTIC to get bush out of office, then, push kerry as hard left as we can to bring about more social equality, and work on building third party support on local levels so we can eventually achieve and multiparty system on a naional scale. For now though, not voting democrat is comparable to not voting at all (if you don't support bush) in relation to the outcome of the presidential election. It means one less vote against war, oppression of womens and gay and poor peoples rights, support of the patriot act (which kerry says he will repeal) and all the other atrocities that the bush administration, that we (since we, the country, let this whole thing happen) have created.

besides, nader accepted money from the republican party-he knows he's being used by them as a tool to support bush.
-jordan

making change??? 21.Sep.2004 23:24

---

You wanna make change? stop arguing, for chrissakes-we all want the similar outcomes, thats why we're reading this.

lets makes some change...

1. ride a bike
2. get one person you know to ride a bike. if everyone makes a connection with one friend to get them to ride a bicycle, we will double the amount of bike riders.
3. repeat steps 1 and two
4. oil is all of a sudden losing out.

oh yea, with a word to not voting democrat...has there evre been any long lasting radical change in political history, ever? please explain to me how we're gonna change the world by voting third party and inevitably putting bush in office again?

plenty of disinfo alright 21.Sep.2004 23:34

ex-democrat voter

"Neocons gradually took control of conservatism in the 60's through 90's by understanding the anatomy of power--organization."

Indeed, and during the 80's through today they have taken control of liberalism (calling it neo-liberalism, which has no distinction from neo-conservatism) and the democratic party by controlling the ideologies of the democratic leadership through the DLC and DNC.

"When Republicans pounded Clinton for that, where was the support?"

Indeed, and you defeat your own case by the fact the the democrats sacrificed Elders, as they have every progressive in the democratic party, particularly those who were women. There were plenty of people supporting Elders, just none in the democratic party.

"You're just playing into their hands"

Yes, calling for Bush's impeachment is playing right into their hands, as opposed to say, supporting the war in Iraq which must keep the republicans awake at night in fear.

"I do not see it offensive or stupid to vote democrat"

Good, then vote democrat, just realize that others do find it offensive and stupid and we will vote in a way that makes sense to us.

"True, it is appalling that many voted for the patriot act, homeland security, and the war, and this makes me not want to vote for them."

Many, try most, and also voted for the rest of the Bush agenda, and the eerily similar Clinton agenda before that (remember the anti-terrorism act, welfare "reform", and NAFTA).

"The Democratic party is the only party that can put bush out of office, which is our primary goal here"

Actually, first, the democratic party seems to have a hard time defeating Bush, an idiot any respectable party should defeat in a landslide. Second, most democrats say they prefer the politics of third parties over the democrats, meaning that any party with the exposure of the democratic party could easily beat Bush. Third, my goal is not to remove Bush from office. While I would agree that Kerry is a step forward merely because we need him in office to prove once again to people how bad the democrats truly are, that is not an important enough goal for me to waste my vote over.

"push kerry as hard left as we can"

Clinton's rhetoric was pushed left by Perot. Given the democratic party's actions against Nader, they will not let that happen again.

"For now though, not voting democrat is comparable to not voting at all"

So much for voting is a tactic I guess...

"It means one less vote against war, oppression of womens and gay and poor peoples rights, support of the patriot act (which kerry says he will repeal) and all the other atrocities that the bush administration, that we (since we, the country, let this whole thing happen) have created."

No, Kerry has not said he will repeal the Patriot Act. Nor has he said he will repeal the Homeland Security Act or the Anti-terrorism Act. Kerry and Edwards are opposed to gay marriage; so much for gay rights. They also allowed Bush to push through the Unborn Victims of Violence Act ; so much for supporting a woman's right to choose. Nor is a vote for Kerry against war since Kerry supports the war.

"besides, nader accepted money from the republican party"

And Kerry has accepted many times as much as Nader from republicans, including from Halliburton, but since Kerry's your hero I guess you'll be only to eager to overlook that fact.

Impeach Bush, dump Kerry, and let's move forward.

And, for Kerry supporters, get your facts straight if you want to debate Kerry's merits, or lack thereof. It gets tiring pointing out the same fallacious assumptions time and time again, though I am happy to keep doing it if you insist. In the future, consider looking for some arguments with some strength and factual support.

I Agree With Anarchy-nonymus 22.Sep.2004 12:03

Mistletoe Angel

Anarchy-nonymous is correct, all of you.

Don't you see what's happening here? Do you not see the real reason why we must unite?

This hostility to one another is exactly what the Bush-Cheney ticket want. They WANT us to fight, be divided. And those of you using your bias behavior in bashing Democrats is their plan in action.

Right now they're winning. It is actually YOUR behavior which is appeasing their bid for re-election here. You've bought this propaganda which these neo-cons, Fox News, etc. have fabricated.

I defend my claim again. All of you bashing the Dems; it's just your opinion molded from biased propaganda. You bash the Dems on helping Bush get on the ballot in Alabama, etc. Yet, you provide no thorough evidence of that, and considering Alabama is a staunch Republican state, Bush would any year easily get on that states ballot single-handedly. You bash the Dems on being all "pro-war" when in fact 95% of their delegates are now against that war, Kerry has come out to say he believes we were misled into Iraq, and has a goal in returning our troops home in his first term. Now, you intentionally try and discredit others like Novoselic as long as their opinions don't agree with yours.

I've had my bone to pick with Nader, that's true. However, I can forgive him for getting help from Republicans in getting on state ballots whose politics contradict his and his naive demeanor in running in the first place. It's less than even a slap on the wrist when you compare it to the tens of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani civilians and over a thousand of our own men and women dead he's responsible for, along with approximately 150 he agreed to give the death penalty to as governor of Texas. Bush has an immense, almost inconceivable amount of penitence to make for these crimes, and he has not yet taken responsibility for these heinous acts.

No, Nader's forgiven. After all, he's one of our own, a courageous man, perhaps too courageous, whose voice still yearns to be heard.

Now, can all of you bashing Kerry find a place to forgive him? To break free from this plan to divide us? To break free of this relentless doubt?

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

yes I see what's happening here 22.Sep.2004 12:37

ex-democrat voter

The democrats want to line us all up behind their kinder, gentler war-monger. Are you so blind that you cannot see that? If the democrats wanted the progressive vote they should have run someone with progressive ideas. They chose not to; they don't get votes by default. They don't get votes by sucking up to Bush for 4 years and promising to be different. But why perceive this as hostility? I'm merely pointing out the facts; Kerry is not a progressive. Kerry has supported Bush's agenda. If you can find anything factually inaccurate please point it out. If you cannot understand why people would be disgusted with Kerry's actions and not want to support him than I feel sorry for you. You will never win people over unless you can understand their point of view. And most democrats are simple incapable of understanding the progressive point of view.

"Yet, you provide no thorough evidence of that, and considering Alabama is a staunch Republican state, Bush would any year easily get on that states ballot single-handedly."

Alabama has a democrat controlled house that allowed Bush on the ballot. Illinois did the same. California did the same. As did several other states. But this has already been answered, but I guess you choose not to read.

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/09/297413.shtml#142318

"Kerry has come out to say he believes we were misled into Iraq, and has a goal in returning our troops home in his first term."

First of all, "we" weren't misled. I wasn't misled. People who read sites like indymedia weren't misled. And Kerry wasn't misled. We all knew that Bush and his administration was lying. Kerry acted in the way he thought was politically expedient, no doubt ruminating his bid for president at the time. Kerry has switched his position on Iraq so many times no serious person could take any of his statements seriously at this point. I appreciate his movement toward a position against the war, but he has lost all credibility in the process. And frankly, I don't think people want 4 more years of war on Iraq. So we'll see how many more times Kerry's position on Iraq changes in the next few weeks (and whether Bush will take the risk or changing his own position to completely trounce Kerry).

"Now, can all of you bashing Kerry find a place to forgive him?"

Am I bashing Kerry, by pointing out his support for Bush's policies, and Clinton's neo-liberal policies before that which have harmed the people of this country and around the world? No, that's just education. I don't feel there is anything to forgive Kerry for. He's doing what he thinks is best. Why should I forgive him for that? Should I forgive him for voting for policies that have done irreparable harm to the people of this world? Would you? Would you forgive Bush? I don't see a need to forgive, they are acting in their best interests, and that is obvious.

People have said we should blame Bush for the war but our constitution puts the power to declare war in the hands of congress for a reason. By abdicating their constitutional responsibilities I find them just as culpable as the Bush administration. The blood is on all of their hands. And they knew better, or do the democrats really want to keep portraying Kerry as someone so na´ve as to have been fooled by the transparent campaign to promote the war. Yes, it plays well to the American public who do feel like they were misled; but it is an obvious lie.

"To break free from this plan to divide us?"

Indeed let's unite behind a progressive candidate. Why not have Kerry drop out of the race and endorse Nader or Cobb or Kucinich? All democrats talk about how much they dislike Kerry, without even having to be prompted. So why not support a good candidate, one that appeals to progressives instead of one that appeals to republicans? Perhaps that is too obvious, and certainly too much of a threat for the democratic leadership who would rather live in Bush's world, than a progressive one.

We will not all line up behind Kerry anymore than many republicans are going to line up behind Bush (they'd rather have Kerry, which should tell you something). You cannot expect people to unite behind principles that they fundamentally disagree with. Show people leadership, conviction, principles, and a desire to really improve the state of the country and you won't have to beg people for unity, you will simply find it. One day, people who consider themselves democrats are going to realize how their party leadership has led them astray. Perhaps then we can work together for some substantial changes.

And once again, do you Kerry supporters ever bother to research your own candidate? I'm honestly embarrassed by how often I have to relate simple facts to you. You know, it's not impossible to build a factually accurate case for voting for Kerry but I never see it coming from an actual Kerry supporter. I guess I know why that is.

Cheers.

this is the dumbest thing... 22.Sep.2004 13:05

bassilah

i have ever seen; "Music and poetry don't change the world."

art is the only thing worth changing the world for. What is the point of art if it doesnt say something, move something inside of you? what is the point of life without art? i dont mean art in the strictest sense of the word, i mean art as in creating. What is the point of life without creating? art is one of the few things that can influence the world in a pure way. (which isnt to say it always does). do you think you can reach any type of higher enlightenment through anything but creative endevors? oh, wait, maybe the whole point of changing the world is so we can all work the same ammount of hours and have the same utterly meaningless lives, in which we learn absolutely nothing, and then die. sign me up for that revolution. The whole problem with a large part of political theory is that it refuses to address that there are more needs in life than simply physical satisfaction, that there is more sufferings than strictly physical ones. How often have you been moved, learned from anything other than novels, poetry, writing of any sort, paintings, conversation, speculating on the greater things in the world, etc.?
art can be revolutionary in political terms. most of the zappatistas communications were written as poetry. the sandinistas in nicaragua got a very popular singer to record a song that was about how to load and properly use a gun. to paraphrase Joe Hill, the famous radical red folk singer, pamphlets are read once and rarely remembered, but songs are learned by heart and sung over and over.
such psuedo-marxist bullshit reduces the entirely world to mediocracy and robotacy.
Joe Hill is probably rolling over in his grave.
grr.

rolling stone cover 22.Sep.2004 19:43

krak

did anyone ever see the Rolling Stone issue with Nirvana on the front? Kurt was wearing a shirt that read "Corporate Magazines still suck". I thought that was pretty cool.

From what I've read about Kurt, he was anti-establishment. I remember skimming through his journal that was published a couple of years ago - lots of rantings against the man in that.

As for Krist, I think he has good intentions, but is not radical.

Another thing. I remember seeing an interview where kurt said they deliberately made In Utero a lot heavier (like Bleach) than Nevermind specifically to piss off all the MTV watchers.

And then there is also the song on In Utero 'Radio Friendly Unit Shifter'. If that isn't a dig at the corporate music world, i dont know what is.

Use just once and destroy
Invasion of our piracy
Afterbirth of a nation
Starve without your skeleton key
I love you for what I am not
I do not want what I have got
A blanket acne'ed with cigarette burns
Speak at once while taking turns

What is wrong with me (x3)

This had nothing to do with what you think
If you ever think at all
Bi-polar opposites attract
All of a sudden my water broke
I love you for what I am not
I do not want what I have got
A blanket acne'ed with cigarette burns
Second-rate third degree burns

What is wrong with me
What is what I need
What do I think I think

Hate, hate your enemies
Save, save your friends
Find, find your place
Speak, speak the truth

What is wrong with me (x3)
What do I think I think



Another thing. Kurt sometimes wore a dress on stage. He hated all the machismo around.

Sanctions in Iraq 22.Sep.2004 19:57

Anarchy-nonymous

Yes, Clinton kept the sanctions in place, and yes there was great death during that time, but I regard that as a legacy he inherited from Bush. He did do some things to alleviate those sanctions, so some exceptions were made for medicines and such. Also, even under those sanctions, Iraq was allowed to rebuild its irrigation system so it had clean water, power, etc. Contrast that with today.

Also, the sanctions were all along touted as the way to control Sadam. Even Condi Rice and Colin Powell admitted the sanctions had kept Iraq militarily impotent, though they forgot that right after Bush started pining for war. Clinton had opportunities to play army with the world's superpower on several occasions, but never wrecklessly started the kind of mess we have in Iraq now. Nobody cites the number of civilian casualities, and they certainly don't cite the number of Iraqis who have died of dyhydration and disease.

We need to support the Democratic party, get Kerry in office, get rid of the Republican majority control over the Legislature and Supreme Court, make sure Bush and friends stand trial for what they have done, THEN start pushing for some of the more progressive reforms we seek, like opening the system to more political parties. Political power is most fundamentally influenced by SIZE of organization, and FOCUS of organization. This is Poly Sci 101. The fascists... uh, Republicans, know this all to well. In fact, it's been a keystone of just about every great empire in history. They keep their minions focused on polarizing, emotional issues like abortion and God, and therefore maintain the scale to beat a liberal contingent of society that is constantly arguing amongst itself.

relearn lost skills 22.Sep.2004 21:29

mamansita

inmemeorium-
nothing up top but a bucket and a mop and an illustrated book about birds-

seen alot out there but don't be sceered - you'll get :smart?" i know that's not just right) when you get burned


what this all lays before me is an image of a world abandoned and regrowing - decaying, weeds hoistin up concrete and flowers growin up the sky scrapers


and a quiet stillness where only a bird is heard

so don't be sceered of the collapse- when it all goes down- my friends- just learn to duck and cover
and learn your survival skills to survive after they kill each other off. Little sister will outlive big brother!-
a bird book may be helpful, as suggested- but how about a few wild edible books ? and an herbal medicinal one as well. fruit(s) of plants for the meat- leaves for medicines

probaly 95 percent of the weeds out their are not only edibles but useful medicinals as well.

so don't run when power runs out

stay behind and establish a common paradise hope to see you there

oh i kmow some asshole could probably fuck everything up but that happens on a national level anyway. might as well live like we want the (new) world- just like the primordial one we were born outov.

but then maybe if enough of us learn to value and take care of and support eachother and the earth as an inter-related family i have almost reached it at one time or another

i'll try if you will. build underground house with a hearth at the heart. drink water straight from the rock. plant a garden on the roof. learn the plants around you and what they offer us.

Lost Skills...? 22.Sep.2004 21:48

Anarchy-nonymous

Mamasita, with all due respect, mankind has never learned the skill of bouncing back after ICBMs as much as 200 times more powerful than what was dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki blanket the earth. Concrete within a six mile radius of such a blast will become molten. Firestorms will erupt and envelope a 20 mile radius of these weapons. Maybe if you are 30 or 40 miles away, you can duck the heat wave, but not the radiation.

I'm sure I'm being too cynical here... Let's just say 1000 Al-Queda suicide attackers pour across our unguarded borders, coordinate refuge in the 1000 largest cities in America, and introduce Ebola to our water supply and weapons grade Small Pox to hotel laundry. Emergency rooms will be overrun in days, martial law will be declared, and America will become dotted with mass graves.

And we have an idiot, wet-brained, DT, coke fiend with no respect for human life and ego the size of Texas in the most powerful job in the world. I think I'll vote for Kerry, thank you. You can sing Nirvana songs and start again in a nuclear wasteland, as you try to keep the flesh from falling off your bones.

learn the history, it does hold answers 22.Sep.2004 22:10

historian

Clinton had no need to keep humanitarian sanctions in place (except, of course, to keep Hussein in power), yet he did, and the price was worth it according to his administration. The only exceptions made for medicines were after huge international outcry; Clinton did not willingly provide medicine to the Iraqi people. Virtually no infrastructure was rebuilt under the sanctions as the parts were all listed as dual use. The few exceptions were those that defied the sanctions such as doctors without borders to bring medicine and essential equipment to Iraq. In contrast to today the Iraqi's are allowed to import medicines and equipment to rebuild. Of course, though many of them initially felt the lifting of the sanctions was an improvement, as the war continues to wage, under Kerry or Bush, I'm sure they will be increasingly less likely to feel they have benefited in exchanging the sanctions with occupation.

If there is justice, some day the presidents and their administrations of the past several decades will be in shared cells in a prison. Or perhaps they will simply realize that damage they have wrought and have to live tortured lives with the memories of all who have suffered because of them. And what of their supporters? How will it feel to elect Kerry and face the military and civilian casualties of the next 4 years? Will it be justified as merely the "legacy" of a republican president? Will we forget who supported the war and authorized it in violation of the constitution? Will we continue to walk so blindly along this path that has brought us nothing but violence and grief? Will we dance on the ashes of this empire when it falls?

All empires fall; it is only a question of time.

up the youth! 23.Sep.2004 14:46

revolutionary

Novoselic aside, somebody posted the following:

"I'm surprised a fourteen yr. old like yourself would even know about Portland Indy Media. Maybe in a few years you'll learn to articulate yourself , and not feel like you have to be vulgar and demeaning to make your point.
But it's so cute to hear the little ones get all huffy, isn't it?"

This kind of mean age-ism is enough to turn youth off from participating in public debate. Youth should be encouraged to participate, to express themselves, to get involved. Your exclusion tactics are far from revolutionary.

I want to hear what more 14 year olds have to say!