Well, isn't it a big part of the story that for a lot of people, what Romney said and what it meant isn't fully "revealed" yet. For people that closely follow politics, it's an earthquake. But if you don't closely follow politics, you might just see it as more noise that you're not really paying much attention to because you don't see it as potentially having a huge impact on you. So maybe what is needed isn't so much more such revelations as more work drawing the lines for people between what Romney said and what the practical consequences for working people of what Romney said are.
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Michael Meeropol <[email protected]> wrote: > I wish I could be optimistic that the fact that Romney insulted large swaths > of the white working class in his 47% remarks would lead to many of them > waking up to their need to be in solidarity with the poor, people of color > (poor and non-poor), and to break their connection with the right-wing > fat-cats. Here's why I'm not optimistic. WHen Romney refers to those who > are dependent on government and refuse to take personal responsibility, the > white working class (and the right-wing white retirees) say to themselves: > "That ain't me." > > The unwillingness to entertain a different way of looking at the world when > facts that contradict your world-view are thrown right into your face (as in > Romney's comments) seems to be a constant --- It will take many more > revelations such as Romney's speech to create the solidarity that the > working class demonstrated in the 1930s and the next 30 years or so ... > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
