The Non-lessons never spoken

Ignoring the usual morons they go to to explain things, there are some lessons to take away from last night, but not those they will repeat like demented parrots.
Here are the lessons:
1: An organized strategy to maximize votes for the plutocracy and minimize votes for ordinary people
2: Change the laws through legislation and court cases to minimize votes of ordinary people. Bring cases so the right wing majority you created on the court gut the voting rights act to ensure voter suppression is legal. Suppress their votes by such things as id cards and inadequate infrastructure.
3: An organized campaign (2010) to gerrymander congressional districts to over-represent older, whiter, wealthier conservative voters.
4: Spend billions of dollars in organization and advertising. Propaganda and infrastructure.
5: An organized propaganda campaign using the proven techniques to excite the fears of the racists, the stupid and co-opted into voting against their own interest.
6: Co-opt the leadership of the other party, making sure populist programs aren't allowed.
7: Create a sense of despair or hopelessness so voter participation is minimal.
8: Dupe religious voters into voting against their own economic interest by  propaganda;use homophobia, racism, abortion and genuine delusion of irrational people as methods.
9: Use the other typical forms of prejudice available. Convince white working class voters the reason for their difficulties is not the rigged corporate system, but poor and colored people who receive a pittance.
10: Use whatever events are possible to inculcate fear among the populace.
11: Pray the stupid white working class people never wake up. Ensure they are indoctrinated from day one with a belief system completely detached from reality.

Those are the lessons.
.

Buying Democracy; Stewart Mills

Apparently Mr. Mills would rather represent Hedge funds, a military nutball and Koch Industries, rather than the 8th District


This must have been a real party, what with John Boehner sucking down whiskey and smokes: http://politicalpartytime.org/party/37535/ (Notice Stan Hubbard of KSTP)

Some other buyers:

All records listed here: http://realtime.influenceexplorer.com/filings/959224/SA/

SINGER, PAUL NEW YORK, NY 100246048 $5,200 2014-08-11 ELLIOT CAPITAL ADVISORS KOCH INDUSTRIES INC PAC WASHINGTON, DC 200052099 $5,000 2014-09-23 JOHN BOLTON PAC TAMPA, FL 336062693 $5,000 2014-09-29 EXXON MOBIL CORP PAC IRVING, TX 750394202 $5,000 2014-07-30 And from Minnesota, the Davis Family of Cambria, Davisco Foods,  purchasing their personal representative to Congress: DAVIS, MARTIN LE SEUER, MN 56058 $5,200 2014-09-22 CAMBRIA PRESIDENT (Also Davisco Foods)

It's not about the money, until it is about the money and profits.

The NRA, as would be expected, endorsed Stewart Mills ( they very rarely endorse Democrats). But, most likely, it isn't purely politics. Most likely, it is also about profits. The NRA, despite its claim as a "grass roots group of gun-owners" is a largely a political front for the industry itself.

So, why the endorsement, despite Rep. Rick Nolan being a minority member who hunts?

Money. Profits.

Remember, Mill's family business sells firearms and accessories. Mills, with his family's profits derived from the sales, would be both a servant for the industry and profiting from it. Or, one could say, both puppet and part-time puppeteer, depending on the vote.

 He could  wear contributors patches like a Nascar Driver with sponsor's patches festooned across his body, and as he stands on the podium, acknowledge them... "I would like to thank the Koch Brothers, the Gun Industry, Hubbard Broadcasting and all my family members for their contributions."


A true millionaire man of the people, I am sure he would represent them well.

Who is buying what?

Stewart Mills Donations: http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/617/14940751617/14940751617.pdf
"To discover who rules, follow the gold."
http://books.google.com/books/about/Golden_Rule.html?id=CU8oyIlNyQcC

And why...?

Why do two candidates, neither of whom's district is remotely close to the Range, and who likely couldn't tell you where it begins or ends, think it's important to have a stand on mining? Frank Jewell's opponent, in a County Commisoner District that is mostly the central hillside of Duluth, listed this as one of his important issues. In another race for Minnesota House District 7A, the Republican candidate, whose politics are the usual right-wing, paranoia filled views, also lists mining as an important issue, this in a district consisting of East Duluth and its surrounding area.

Why?

While these stands align with Republican and right wing tendencies, this doesn't truly satisfy as an explanation, especially for such local races? It is doubtful hordes of citizens in either district are storming the ramparts for a project nearly 100 miles away with an impact destined more for downstream pollution than of any economic benefit. So why?

Who is funding them, and what do they want in return?

Who is backing them?

Why do they leave?

St. Louis County Commissioner Steve Raukar is being criticized for comments on the Range's population problems, e.g shrinking population and all the problems that derive from it. Commissioner Raukar has supported lower income and vulnerable people, including receiving the Steve Chadwick advocacy award. Having known Steve Chadwick and having worked with Commissioner Raukar, I believe his comments are taken out of context.

His comments regarding the shrinking population is the usual narrative; no jobs=people leave=shrinking populations=problems.

But is that the full problem?

People did and do leave because of a lack of jobs. The Range suffered two catastrophes; the end of the 70's taconite expansion and building boom and the resulting demographic collapse, then the remaining jobs being held by early wave baby boomers. I will not detail the various mistakes of local officials attempting to correct the problem. Name your boondoggle here.

But there are other causes.

The Range is insular. It is good ol' boy. The local officialdom is still dominated by baby boomers who barely understand technology and pine for the days of the mid-70's  boom. In addition, local culture is trapped in a world best described by one of my now deceased Finnish Uncle's: "The smart people moved out, and all that's moved in is dumb white trash". I might add that it is also often who has stayed; while some are unlucky, or by circumstance have remained, many are like those of an Irish village, praying for deliverance from the famine, deliverance being whatever new mining or subsidized industrial project the gods of the IRRRB bless.

One local hospital official described their problem of keeping younger Doctors here to me:
"Would you want to stay in a place without a single coffee shop, with no dating scene, surrounded by a wasteland and racist white people?"
That is a more common experience than you think. The idea that a community, oft dominated by ignorant white men revving big trucks can "attract" simply by  advertising is as inane as any other project, whether feel good bumper stickers or now half empty malls.  The problem is also the people.

There is vastly different world, both good and bad, outside of the Range, and it us much browner, more competitive and has  far more opportunities than moving dirt and greasing axles. And, you don't have to deal with the small town racism, sexism and the  generally backward culture of the Range. Sorry, you can make all the bumper stickers you wish, but with the same people who brought you the last 30 years running things, you will not attract bright young people. Being stared at by mean, ignorant people like an exotic zoo animal does not lend itself to fond memories, even if you have a Finnish last name. I can attest to this personally.

The collapse will continue and the continuing "mining vs. environment" battles attest to this. The Range is now a Third World culture with a small elite, the co-opted who benefit from the system regardless of any ethical quandaries, and the rest. If one speaks out with any new ideas, they are ignored and eye-rolled as if a village lunatic. If they protest the current system, a boot is put to their neck.

These are the other  reason's people leave. A few jobs won't solve that.

This article from the Star Tribune is the latest in the "8th District divide" meme, a narrative thread for years, exacerbated now by the Polymet " debate". I place it in quotes for while the debate is public,  it is often uninformed about law and environmental process. Often, the politics of the process are also uninformed, as many reporters/writers take public political statements at face value, rather than also judging them based as part of a political strategy.

The 8th District has changed and is changing, long gone from the days of the "Range Mafia" group of legislators. While the core remains, the reality is it now probably consists of about four legislators and two state senators, some placed into powerful positions by seniority and strategy. It is not as much a dominant force within the DFL, as the recent Mining platform resolution defeat showed; political insiders would tell you the removal wasn't just "making peace", but  was also because the resolution would be defeated. Demographics are part of this; the Range and Northeastern Minnesota is shrinking and aging by numbers as the empty generation of the 80's and 90's takes hold sans childbirth. And while the political changes can be blamed on numbers, it must also be remembered that social values change as the population changes, and the world, despite the Range's insularity, has changed.

 There are two world views clashing, one of them chained to the colonizer-exploitation economy Northeastern Minnesota was based on, now linked more to corporatization and right wing beliefs, the other, attempting to struggle against the system by fighting for a different social-economic view and the new realities.

The Range DFL dominance derives from decades past, born out of the labor struggles pre-1960. The 1964 Taconite Tax amendment and the IRRRB  helped create and  enlarge the already developing industry, but also gave the local governments the needed share of the proceeds. What is not spoken of is how it also co-opted the local officials, giving them a means of power and a political stake in maintaining mining at all costs, especially after the economic and social catastrophe of the 1980's, still ongoing. It was, and is, an odd and strained coalition. Representatives who support, hold and drive  some of the most progressive positions in the country, at the same time promoting regulation reduction, ignoring pollution, denouncing science showing said pollution and fervently promoting internationally backed projects led by some of the worst polluters on the planet.  The co-option model, as outlined above, is the only explanation, as the communities and local elites power and income derives from mining and other exploitative industries. They, and the communities, wet their beaks in the 60's-70's boom era when money was cheap and now no one wants to give up their cabin. A large part of the  local population, their income tied to the entire process, is understandably just as fundamentalist in their belief, any evidence to the contrary disappeared much like a Khrushchev party speech in the Brezhnev era.

The articles regarding the divide often quote political candidates and leaders as facts, but should also be viewed as public political strategy. A DFL leader making statements such as " My party has left me" is not just stating his disappointment over how party position has changed, but he is also making a point to party leaders: "Support what I want else I support the other party's candidates who will"; this could also be known as the "give me what I want or else I go home" strategy. It is a fear based strategy, based on the ability to deliver votes. The problem is, can the votes actually be delivered, or, 
"Can the Center hold?"

While the new project supporters are fervent, it actually remains a question of how many of them are part of the DFL voting core or coalition.  When the public sites are examined, much of it contains very conservative positions and the names are old, often ranging back to the 1970's BWCA "battles". One is just as prone to see an anti-Obama post or sign as they are  pro-mining. This, perhaps, is where local political officials have failed to account for the difference between tactics and strategy. They have fed an attack dog they thought they had chained and under control, only to find it will simply eat them when hungry. It also says something about them personally; long since co-opted, despite their personal and political  beliefs, they have forgotten that the system is ultimately exploitative of both people and the natural world. Isolated by the ensured employment and relative comfort, they haven't foreseen the demographic and economic changes of the last 30 years. We no longer have the social contract of the post-Roosevelt boomers, instead we now have the Koch Brothers and the WTO. We also have the lunatic followers of the right-wing. There is even a divide between the Steelworker's Union and some project supporters.

As I stated above, the District's demographics have changed, and while some change has come from geography, for example, exurban Chisago county now being part of the district, there is demographic change as well, some from inflow, some from  outflow and some merely part in differences between age groups. The Range, and much of the country, is now a three tier economy, with the elite, the lucky and co-opted who benefit, and the rest much fighting it out for the scraps of low wages with no social support. And no longer can the Northeastern DFL count on a coalition of supporters happily supporting whatever they wish. While the real chances for victory may be slim, it does show a divide, and not a small one. It is as much about a different world view as it is a political fight.

The question might best be, "Have the Range elite simply been too co-opted for too long"? Their power, derived from one industry and a questionable political strategy leads to the question: Is their politics finally failing in the new realities?

Range Quixotic

And for important St. Louis county business, we get this: http://bit.ly/1hZRrfx. As the story says, many local city councils and now the county have passed resolutions against any Polymet review. What bearing this has on the final process is questionable, of course.

But there are other important questions:

1: Why are local government, county and state officials acting as publicly funded lobbyists for  private, multinational backed mining firms?
2: How many of these officials have stock, or potential personal and business benefits. How about their friends and acquaintances?
3: How much other important business  and how many other alternatives  for economic development are ignored?

The Range is not alone in these problems; in fact, they are global in nature, and resource extraction based communities all have similar problems. But, the Range's problems are also historically specific to both mining and logging. The artificial boom of the 60's and 70's was a Potemkin village; built and operated at cost-plus, with feather-bedded workforces and rampant theft, the building and expansion construction booms were due to end. Following Herbert Stein's famous quote: "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop,". The seniority system gave most of the jobs remaining to first wave baby-boomers, thus an entire generation left starting in the 1980's and we now see the results.

Desperate for the days of easy money, local officials now push for their and their friend's personal profit at the expense of everyone else and the natural environment. Using their publicly funded positions, they now spend our tax dollars and time forcing this and other projects down the public throat, all while feasting at the public trough, whether in pay or subsidies.

Sponsor decals

The Range dfl no longer represents people. They are now a wholly owned subsidiary of mining companies. I suggest they wear NASCAR style jackets, with company name decals festooned everywhere to indicate their sponsoring company. To the rest of the state, They are now a farce, a reactionary force bent on extracting from the public trough and handing over resources.