Jeff Golden is an open book. He is who he is.
To Golden, from his website: "Thank you for your profound gift to the world."
Jeff Golden does not need a campaign video. He has a better record of himself via his TV show: http://www.immensepossibilities.org There is an archive of over 100 shows. Pick a recent one, click, and see for yourself.
His show, "Immense Possibilities," featured conversations with people doing work Golden described as inspiring, brilliantly creative, thriving, just, sustainable, and democratic.
The mood of the show was hopeful. The immense possibility of the show title is the notion that individuals and small groups achieve personal self actualization and wider social justice by "coming alive" through challenging the status quo, and thereby changing the world for the better.
Man against the machine. Typical program guests would be people working in opposition to some larger "establishment." The show is not a debate show of point-counterpoint. The show is about the heroic agent of change doing transformation, challenging existing power and tradition.
The tone of the show is best shown by quotations from the show's own website. It is laudatory. What Others Say
A film maker congratulated "Jeff Golden's life-long engagement with the belief that social and political change can be achieved through a passionate engagement with ideas."
Another wrote:
"The interview itself was delivering a transformative element pushing up against my own well-worn patterns of belief. Jeff Golden’s inimitable interviewing style can promise this experience in real time. What better precursor to ‘changing the world’…changing our minds!”
Yet another wrote:
“It was truly an honor to have a conversation with you on Immense Possibilities that asked the deeper questions about the purpose of life and about how people can climb over their discouragement and make the difference in the world they’ve always dreamed of making. Thank you for your profound gift to the world."
The Jeff Golden on video is the Jeff Golden we know, consistent with the Jeff Golden brand as I have observed it for 40 years here in southern Oregon. He communicates some of the same emotion and political orientation student activists felt back in 1969, and the emotion found in the well known quotation by Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it's the only thing that ever has."
 |
| Golden Campaign Webpage |
Golden's website describes him as one of those thoughtful, committed citizens.
He appears to walk the talk. Golden's independence against pressure as a County Commissioner, daring to use the word "retraining" in the face of dramatic drops in timber harvest levels, brought a recall threat. He was guilty of saying the simple truth.
Alone of the candidates he articulates detailed points of view in his website: https://www.goldenforsenate.com
This is a double edged sword for Golden.
Jeff Golden is who he is--thoroughly. I suspect there is a big constituency among Democratic voters grateful to Golden's consistent voice for progressive courage. Insofar as politics is a matter of earning votes from the Bernie Sanders-Ralph Nader spectrum of anti-establishment populism, then Golden has claim to a block of votes. He has credentials as the little guy outsider, fighting the machine. He refuses all PAC money, all union money, and help from the upstate State Party.
Being well-known for 40 years may be a big problem. He has had 40 years to create irritations and resentments in a tight community. We saw in 2016 that voter skepticism and anti-establishment emotion within populist votgers caused people to reject dynasties. Jeb Bush was dismissed out of hand. Democrats revealed profound Clinton-fatigue. Hillary was old news. People were quick to believe the worst of her.
That could be the problem. Golden is consistent, but he is not a bright new face.
There is some risk that Jeff Golden is now considered "the establishment"--an establishment of Baby Boomer progressives living in Ashland who have grown into gray-haired traditionalists in progressive politics, armed with the usual suspects of liberal, environmental donors who have been supporting Golden and politicians of his age cohort for decades. Those cohorts now hold office in the south county.
That old-boy progressive establishment cohort is powerful. The circle knows and trusts each other. It attends each others' weddings and campaign fundraisers and charity donor events. It hangs onto power. It will look to some outsiders like Jeff and his cohort is the establishment enemy--the old-guard that Golden's TV show knows to be the villain, the entrenched power that opposes upstarts.
The candidates dreaming of immense possibility of change by taking on the old-guard are people who want a new guard. They are outside that political circle Jeff Golden created and nourished. They are the new faces: Democrats Kevin Stine, Athena Goldberg, Julian Bell, plus Jessica Gomez, the Republican.
The test for Golden is whether a person as well established as he is can look like an immense possibility, someone new and transformational. It is not clear to me the newcomers have new ideas different from Golden's, but they are outside a circle that may seem closed and ominously tight to some voters. They come without the old baggage.
There are Democrats who want Bernie to move on--not because they hate Bernie, but because he had his turn and it renews old fights and energizes old enemies. Those voters are looking at Kamala Harris and others and wondering if some newer person isn't the voice of the new generation.
There are Democrats who want Bernie to move on--not because they hate Bernie, but because he had his turn and it renews old fights and energizes old enemies. Those voters are looking at Kamala Harris and others and wondering if some newer person isn't the voice of the new generation.
4 comments:
OK, so the issues are:
Healthcare...all the candidates seem to support single payer which means higher taxes.
Climate...action on climate change, which now is irreversible, also means higher taxes.
Economic Fairness...probably means something about taxes.
Social Justice...yeah, taxes, definitely taxes...
Mr. Golden's resume is impressive. I personally admire someone who is so committed to integrating his values, which I share, with a career in communication. While rewarding I'm sure it has involved many sacrifices as well. He has earned the right to be seriously considered for this office.
We hire these folks to be representative of our best selves, and to be stewards of the public good. It is important that they are trustworthy, serious and principled, for they are given a lot of power and with it the temptation for self dealing and other corruption.
At issue is exactly how much injustice and suffering we will tolerate as a price for our collective prosperity and comfort. Regressives maintain a "survival of the fittest" point of view that draws strict lines around who and who is not worthy. Progressives fundamentally believe we all survive or perish together.
Maybe it's time Progressives simply admit that we want to raise taxes, and then go on to explain why. A big part of this is an examination of who gets the profits and if Russia is the economic and political model we are being driven towards.
However it's hard to imagine a candidate whose website would be headlined: "America is Doomed If We Don't Raise Taxes!", even though it's probably true.
The frame should not be "raising taxes" in my opinion. It should be closing tax loopholes that allow super-rich corporations to pay little or no taxes.
The second part is, any taxes that are raised should be on the super-rich who are making record profits.
Thirdly, taxes are an investment if allocated correctly. Every $1 invested in infrastructure equates to about $2 in economic growth (jobs).
Things like Healthcare for all and green infrastructure might raise taxes a bit, but the money saved by investing in more efficent systems and the jobs of the future will ultimately create more money in the pockets of most struggling Americans. Nick H.
In other words, justice and economic growth are not either/or. They go together.
Exactly, but this is the problem.
Regressive politicians use class war to keep taxes low on "job creators", etc., If everyone understands that they all need to contribute, which by the way is an argument that no one should be exempted from paying some tax no matter what their income level (including churches), and that assistance be linked to service and so on, then the moral principle can be extended to include the wealthy. As of now Regressives isolate the rich, creating the narrative that they are victims, then using that to hoard profits. Diabolically clever and effective with a gullible minority.
Post a Comment