Mr. Bowers serves up a mixed metaphor:
The $810 billion Wall Street Bailout is a loadstone [sic] hanging around the neck of the Democratic Party.
Of course, Mr. Bowers wrote "loadstone" when he meant "millstone."
Here's a definition of "loadstone" (or "lodestone"):
A lodestone or loadstone is a naturally magnetized piece of the mineral magnetite. They are naturally occurring magnets, and attract pieces of iron. Ancient people first discovered the property of magnetism in lodestone. Pieces of lodestone, suspended so they could turn, were the first magnetic compasses, and their importance to early navigation is indicated by the name lodestone, which in Middle English means 'course stone' or 'leading stone'.
But if Mr. Bowers wants to keep making his way in Obama's FKDP, he'd better get to know his bible better. The word Mr. Bowers wants is not loadstone, but millstone. Here's the reference (Luke 17:1-2):
1 Then said He unto His disciples, "It is impossible but that offenses will come, but woe unto him through whom they come! 2 It were better for him that a millstone were hung about his neck and he cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to fall.
Now, I think that what Bowers means -- metaphorically speaking -- is that the Dem leadership was the occasion of sin ["offenses "] in voters ["these little ones"], because by passing TARP, they caused people who might otherwise have been converted to the Democratic party to turn away from it (cf. Matthew 12:31-32 on the unforgivable sin). He writes:
The $810 billion Wall Street Bailout is a loadstone hanging around the neck of the Democratic Party. It thwarting what should have been a realigning moment in American electoral politics. Upon regaining control over the federal government following the 2008 elections, Democrats should have been able to cement their image as, in the words of Al Gore, "the people versus the powerful." Instead, we have become complicit in perpetuating a federal government that is more responsive to the wishes of powerful moneyed interests at the expense of the vast majority of Americans. And so, our chances at realignment are slipping away.
(Nobody could have predicted...)
But it's possible to put a millstone around somebody's neck, because a millstone has a hole in the middle (it's the Biblical equivalent of the South African necklace, I imagine). A loadstone has no hole in the middle, so it can't go around anyone's neck.
So what could Mr. Bowers have meant? I think his slip, like many such slips -- Will Doctor Freud please pick up the white courtesy phone? -- shows some of his unconscious fears. Because a loadstone is all about navigation, direction, "leading", it's a symbol of the direction that the Dem leadership has chosen: towards servicing Big Money 24/7. His post, intellectually, is all about this fear. What Bowers' slip shows, I think, is that the same fear lurks deep in his unconscious as well. An interesting data point. Incremental progress. The breaking down of denial. It's all good!
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[encrypted]+#b94+
Printer-friendly version


Front page



Comments
Mr Bowers --> Mr Friedman? | Yapping
I hope Mr Bowers isn't on his way to becoming Mr Friedman. Matt Taibbi, in a justly celebrated book review of The World is Flat, said of Tom Friedman: "He has an anti-ear, and it's absolutely infallible; he is a Joyce or a Flaubert in reverse, incapable of rendering even the smallest details without genius," an endlessly entertaining observation. Doesn't seem like Chris is quite there yet.
You mention a "South African 'necklace' " (absolutely gruesome) and I'm thinking at first, for some reason, Yap money:

which might be, superficially, a little more millstone-ish.
Bowers/Friedman. South African necklace/Yap money. All your brilliance is lost in a zany flood of random, inappropriate associations on my end. I'm glad you're not writing just for this audience of one. You are, too, I reckon.
Every apathetic citizen is a silent enlistee in the cause of inverted totalitarianism.—Sidney Wolin
Bowers Is Right To a Point
Where he is wrong, IMO, has been failing to see that some - not all, by any means - of the teabag protestors are in the group that could've been realigned. And that, in that regard, the "progressive" blogosphere has not helped the cause of building a movement to regain the people's control of government because they've been more interested in dismissing them as a political force than in trying to co-opt some of them. What's more, by caving so early on meaningful healthcare reform (a real Hacker-like public option, single payer), it only reinforces the idea that "progressives" are perfectly comfortable with the corporatist Democratic Party leadership.
But, I do agree that we're starting to see some movement. I think we'd see more if these guys spent more time at the economics blogs. I think that's why Ian Welsh saw things so much earlier than some of the other people who post at OL, he was paying attention to TARP all along.
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right -- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. " - Eleanor Roosevelt