Well someone is trying to do something
I missed this until it came up on my Facebook feed:
Fork In The National Road: A New Progressive Supermajority Party Is Forming
I like the idea -- it is, after all, a promise of realignment -- but there shouldn't be just one convergence. How about lots of convergences? They sent Bernie an invitation. What if he says he's busy on those days? Hold another one. If Bernie refuses, hold the next one in Vermont.
Will Sanders shift course in September and unite the Progressive supermajority?
If no, then what then? Remember, Bernie was threatened, or so said Julian Assange.
Scrolling down:
Sure, as Sanders urges, the Democratic Party in many states is like a fabulous empty old house built with what once were the best materials, an endless maze of rooms. Sanders and others argue, “Why not repair it?” Technically that could work, and Sanders clearly sees how. A big chunk of Progressives are trying to clean it up, but are met by belligerence if not fraud at every turn.
The argument about fraud is very important to the cause and should be repeated at every opportunity. Bernie's strategy so far is to wait until the fraud at the top stops. Yeah, that's how we deal with hardened criminals these days; wait until they stop committing crimes. Oh, and be vewwy vewwy quiet, in case they feel like committing crimes or something on any particular day. (Yeah, more Elmer Fudd politics. We need to get beyond it.) Scrolling down:
To kickstart a new Progressive party, the trick basically is to link all the active groups —- Progressives are an intense bunch — whether Sierra, La Raza, Physicians for Universal Healthcare, Greens or Black Lives Matter. That’s happening. We are 66% of the US voters, two-thirds, a clear supermajority that is growing as younger voters reach eighteen. We could sweep every federal, state and local election if we organized as a coalition party.
To get these "active groups" on board, they will have to deal with the phenomenon of the Veal Pen as described by Jane Hamsher. A lot of "active groups" are dependent upon foundation money. The Democrats' obvious first response to the creation of a new progressive party will be to try to get the foundations to yank their money from organizations that endorse it in any way.
So, yeah, http://convergence2017.org . Pass it on. Can they get any good rock bands to play for the assembled multitudes?
Comments
Well that is interesting
I feel like the numbers are there. The awareness is growing. What's missing is that first bit to start the crystallization process.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
@SnappleBC I'm pretty sure the
I'm pretty sure the numbers are there. Bernie's campaign pretty much proved that. But the problem isn't the lack of a crystallizing event; the problems are 1)half the people in this progressive supermajority are vulnerable to the OMG Trump! propaganda (by which I mean when someone in the establishment says OMG Trump! they tend to run out and be their obedient footsoldiers), and 2)those who are in real power in this country don't have to play by the rules, as Cassiodorus mentions (the strategy really is waiting for them to stop, apparently).
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Neville Chamberlain tried it too.
If we wait long enough, you see, Hitler will stop.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus Well, I suppose
Well, I suppose technically that's true. He would have stopped when he controlled all of Europe and most of North Africa. Maybe.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
We must be talking about different numbers
Included in my group are those who are aware that we are ruled by a plutocratic elite and it doesn't matter a hill of beans what we want, who we vote for, who we donate to, etc. My sense is that's been a growing group over time and Bernie's run energized it. Yes, I also understand that an awful lot of people who supported Bernie also didn't listen to Bernie or didn't believe him so saw Hillary as their second choice. Those are the folks who are susceptible to OMG Trump.
The people in my group are not susceptible to that because, as much as I acknowledge that Trump is terrifying on a great many levels, the Democrats offer no safe port in the storm. So cries of "Scary Trump!" are meaningless to me. I always want to say, "Yeah, I understand Trump is awful. Are you seriously expecting me to find succor in the loving arms of the bankers and corporations?"
Still, I think more and more people are waking up to reality. Yet there remains this problem of what to do. We find ourselves in lots of little isolated pockets... often times on opposite sides of previous ideological wars. A focal point would be helpful. Bernie was that.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
The numbers are NOT there
for "social justice." In the go/no-go, that's a no-go. Social justice as conceived of today is a tool of division run by billionaires. How many states are majority white? How many of those voters are going to apologize for their whiteness and agree that they deserve their rising death rates? How many parents are going to to nod with submissive downcast eyes as they accept their five year old daughter's punishment for accidentally misgendering a classmate? How many more times are working people supposed to get fucked over because it would be racist or sexist to object?
This is sheer sophomore year fantasy.
If the goal is to actually accomplish something for people who need help, as opposed to just feeling superior and lecturing others on their manners, a supermajority party would need a different paradigm from the poisoned discourse of social justice. Maybe something more rooted in fairness or equality. Something that evokes a sense of cooperation and compromise, as opposed to, "It's time for you to be silent." If the latter does gain the upper hand, it will be a sure sign of the triumph of the neoliberals.
Same thing in Europe, giving rise to “identitarian” pushback
The elite in Germany expects people to accept that their children and grandchildren of white European stock will be a minority in their own country, having been demographically displaced by people of migrant background with much higher birth rates.
http://www.dw.com/en/germany-sees-record-number-of-people-with-immigrant...
Anybody not on board with this who speaks out is in danger of losing their livelihood and being ostracized as a near Nazi.
The Right is in denial about the effects of adding CO2 to the atmosphere. The Left is in denial about the effects of adding people of different ethnicity, religion, and culture to a population.
@Cassandrus Uh, it depends on what
Uh, it depends on what you mean by social justice. That's obvious, but I think it needs to be said--we don't want the corporatists to define terms. We want to remember what the terms meant before the corporatists got to them.
Before 2010, I never heard of a concept of "social justice" that excluded economic justice. Or that excluded criticism of a tyrannical police state and disregard of the rule of law. Or that excluded any consideration of what was happening beyond our shores.
All these things are a result of the Age of Obama. Obama was the one who downloaded the patch that gave us Social Justice 2.0, in which racism has nothing to do with money, little or nothing to do with the cops (there's some bad apples who need to learn better, but nothing wrong with the institution), nothing to do with the rule of law (those rich people on Wall St will never be prosecuted, you silly sausage!) and nothing at all to do with imperialism or war.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cassandrus Anyway, I'm not sure
Anyway, I'm not sure where you got the idea that we're talking 60% of the U.S. population being SJWs. We're talking about actual left-wing politics, not this puppet show run by the Democratic party and the media (and probably the CIA--witness how Sy Hersh said that the Russiagate thing was a Brennan op.)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It's not about Bernie.
It's about if people will wake up.
Hello? The duopoly must be broken. There really is no other choice.
Will Bernie recommend and push for a third party? If not, he need shut up and be party with the demonrats.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
Bernie lost a lot of us.
Since conceding.
@Pricknick People are awake. They
People are awake. They just don't see what they can do.
They are demoralized and faced with an extremely ugly tactical situation.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Here's what Sanders said, again, on Tuesday.
The town hall meeting showed that Sanders is attempting to prop up the Democratic Party under conditions of mounting popular disaffection with the entire official political system. He reiterated his calls to improve voter turnout in order to ensure higher returns for Democratic candidates, and called upon younger people attracted to his campaign to run as Democrats in local elections. In response to an audience question calling on him to found a new “people’s party,” Sanders responded, “I don’t want Trump around for another four years. I don’t want Republicans in control of the House and Senate. I want Democrats to open the door; I want Democrats to be the party not of corporate interests, but of the working class.”
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/08/26/sand-a26.html
Yeah, I want to win the Powerball.
Only occasionally spend the $2 for a ticket. Just when it gets in the hundreds of millions payoff. And I have a better chance of pulling that off than old Bernie does at 'reforming' Al From/Bill Clinton's Turd Way Neo-liberal 'New' Democratic Party.
Pfffffft!
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
@Amanda Matthews I want to start a
I want to start a network of independent sustainable communities of freethinkers across this country. I want my own press and my own internet access so that I'm not beholden to corporate for my signal. I want to stop global warming. I want to stop war for profit. I want a National Health Service. I want a river of real legal justice directed right through the Augean stables of Wall St. I want the rule of law to be more important than the rule of wealth--and separate from it. Or I don't want law at all.
I also want to visit Istanbul. I want to visit Chiapas. I want a beautiful vacation home in Spain.
I want a lot of things I probably won't get.
Actually, what this speaks to is the poverty of Sanders' imagination. Surefire evidence--if we needed more--that he's compromised.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I want.... I want......
Yeah, Bernie, and people in Hell want ice water, too!
Get your head out of your ass, Bernie. The duopoly must fall. We already have one Republican Party too many, and actually we have two of them.
You need to DemExit. Not just in name, either, but publicly.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Bernie last week, was stumping
at fake town hall meetings with John Conyers. Conyers is a co chair at The Third Way. I like the article as the numbers of the discontented with this insane dupoly are there and ripe for real change. As far as waiting for Bernie to coalesce with the large number of people wanting a new party it's like waiting for Godot. The political measurement gauge of left center right are so tweaked that they mean nothing anymore. The authors definition of what progressive means is a good one but many people who call themselves or 'identify' as a progressive are not willing to step outside the duopolies partisan definition. Sure they will march for 'socially liberal' injustices or causes but many are not willing to challenge the status quo or take a hard look at the Demorat's agenda and policy. They really do believe the Demoratic party can be somehow 'reformed' or that people like Conyer's are progressive. Then again I've noticed that a lot of people I know who we're blaming lefties for Trump are starting to see beyond their fear. The establishment Demoratic party is doing a fine job of showing their true colors almost every time the Dem. pols speak or their corporate puppet media propagandists tell another whooper.
@#2.3 Delete
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The Party and the Party faithful will scream about any
formation of a major "third" party, they do so love democracy, ha.
They will point the finger and say it's your fault that they are bloody useless.
Including the word "Party" makes the headline 100% incorrect
Yes, there is an indy supermajority, NO there is not a super-majority party forming.
So, the referenced article including the word "Party" in its headline makes the headline 100% incorrect
Because, as you said:
"The Party and the Party faithful will scream about any formation of a major "third" party"
The article even explicitly contradicts the headline: "The country’s Progressive supermajority could sweep every local, state and federal election if it united."
(I suspect an AOL editor wrote the headline, not the author. So much for hierarchical management, doubly so for the sold out HuffPost, triply for Arianna 'in it for the money' Huffington. "HuffPost is a politically liberal American news and opinion website and blog ... Founded by Andrew Breitbart, Arianna Huffington ...")
(edited for clarity)
I saw that the other day.
As I recall, you have been very indifferent to voter coalitions and alliances as a powerful method to exert influence and strategically swing elections. It was a silent alliance that demolished the Democratic Party and threw the nation into chaos in 2017. While for the most part, many dropped the ball on taking control and, instead, obsessed about fixing the Democratic Party. A harsh but necessary new reality was forced on the American people. They have no choice but to wake up, thanks to Donald Trump.
The predictable failure of the DNC lawsuit is another boon to the Left. It will help people to finally understand and accept the fact that the political parties are not government organizations and have no legal obligation to operate as such. They are very private very exclusive clubs where it is perfectly legal to hold mock elections and pick the pockets of people who think they are part of something democratic. The moment that people accept that there's no political solution available to them is the moment when we can create a different future — and not a minute before.
I found the Fork in the Road article very encouraging just in its fluid structure. When the majority of people truly understand that they are blocked from fielding a candidate in the US presidential election, transformative strategies and paradigms will be born. The Left has yet to have a discussion about the stark reality of the constraints on mass political mobility. I ran across another small essay that points to the beginnings of clarity settling in: America now has 3 political parties. And the Republicans and Democrats aren't among them.
The times call for statesmanship.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
I'm not clear on some of this.
What did I say?
Hasn't the Democratic Party been in steep decline since 2010 when it lost Congress?
Nobody batted an eyelash when Secretary Clinton brought fresh despair to the peoples of Honduras, Haiti, Libya, Syria, or the Ukraine.
President Trump is merely one of many instances when the Democratic Party chose to hand off to the Republicans rather than let the great unwashed masses decide anything. You know, during the Bush Junior years, Trump himself was a Democrat.
Anyway I'm glad you liked the article, and I'm sure you can clarify what you've been saying at some point.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus I guess you could say
I guess you could say it was a silent alliance that abandoned the Democrats in 2010 and started this steep decline. But I'd say it was more of a (mostly) silent assessment by the coalition that had put Obama in office in the first place(which people now forget, actually included a fair number of Republican voters--amusingly, by campaigning to the left of where he actually was, Obama pulled a number of Republicans, just like Bernie did when he was campaigning on the left. Funny how that works).
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cassiodorus
I don't think she was speaking to you specifically.
Out of sight, out of mind.
All politics is local.
It sounds to me as if you don't support either side of the fork. I don't think I do. Obama had a unique opportunity in time to change history, and he opted for cash and 7 million dollar retirement home. Bernie had another unique opportunity in time to change history by bolting and running with Jill Stein, and he opted to quit. Unless a new unique opportunity presents itself AND someone chooses legendary over self-interest, I think we better get used to doing as the billionaires tell us.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
All the way up to the climate change disasters.
When philosophizing about politics, it's important to start from the right premises. Do we have the right premises?
Sometimes it helps to defend our premises, so that we can know for ourselves what we are doing and we can renew our dedication to solutions. Self-interest, for instance. What is self-interest? Self-interest is our idea of self-interest. Is our idea of self-interest any good? What about everyone else's idea of self-interest? Is that any good? Self-interest is doing what's best for us. Is "normal" participation in a reckless society doing what's best for us?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@Cassiodorus I think it's likely
I think it's likely that survival and what we would, in this country, consider a comfortable standard of living, constitute "self-interest" for most people. There are other things that also might fall under that rubric.
And no matter what anybody's ideas of self-interest, my guess is not many people think the current political system is serving them.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cassiodorus "Normal
"Normal participation in a reckless society" is only in our self-interest to the extent that it keeps us from being killed, tortured, thrown into prison or falling immediately into crushing poverty (if we haven't yet). I think that's why people are still going about their days. Those are pretty much the basic survival goals. But that's not the same thing as having a political movement, of course.
If you're gonna have people risk any of the bad consequences I listed above, there has to be a very compelling goal and a reasonable (say at least 50%) chance of eventually achieving said goal. Unless, of course, there is imminent destruction right in your face, in which case any chance above 0% of achieving the compelling goal will get people on their feet (like this):
We have goals, or at least policy positions that could become goals, that would be compelling to a lot of people. For instance, no matter how much we despise Sanders for being an imperialist, falling in line with crap propaganda, bowing to Clinton, etc., there are obviously parts of his speech that most people here have supported at one time or another--though they don't go far enough. These are the goals of economic populism, taking control of the government away from the powerful and the rich and giving it to the people, establishing and maintaining a fair and consistent rule of law, stopping the poisoning of water and air, getting actual affordable health care to the people, creating an education system for children that isn't a cesspit, etc. And, though Sanders rarely talked about this, I think there's a real desire on both sides of the party duopoly and outside it, to end the wars, which people are sick of and which they've finally figured out do not serve them.
So, we share some of the purported goals of the Sanders campaign. Well, those goals sold like hotcakes. Too bad he didn't mean what he was saying. But as I've argued here often, the problem here is not that the majority of the American people hate the policy goals we often support. If we were in any kind of non-authoritarian political system, any system where it mattered what the people thought, we could build a powerful movement fairly quickly.
The only question is whether there is any action we can take that would have any impact beyond eliciting punishment from the authoritarian status quo.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cassiodorus It sounds like
It sounds like creating a mission statement. That basically forces people (if done right) to confront all their assumptions and discover whether or not they are in agreement with themselves, even. It makes them define what they care about most, what they really mean, etc. It also, when you get to the strategy and tactics portion of the discussion, makes people confront the relationship of the idea to possible actions.
I've been wanting to go through this process for a while, but not exclusively online, and not without some sign that we are willing to commit to at least come together face to face and put time into this process.
If I can't organize a coffee klatch or a beer night, there's no way I'm going to be able to organize a revolution. Trying to define one's mission in an exclusively online conversation doesn't work well in my experience unless the mission and its component parts are going to be an exclusively online affair.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Pluto's Republic The moment that people
The moment that people accept that there's no political solution available to them is the moment when we can create a different future — and not a minute before.
I think a lot of people have accepted that. But since all we have in our history for precedent is 1)a political solution, and 2)overthrow of the government with military force, and clearly the second isn't happening (outside the fevered imaginations of some in the right), a lot of the people who have accepted the futility of U.S. politics simply have stopped listening or talking.
Markos' numbers aren't going down just because he sucks. I bet numbers are going down at political sites across the board--though of course censorship adds a special cherry on top of that sundae (thanks, Google!)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
good read
Thanks for posting that story,Im onboard I will never trust the DNC again,they have counted on [we have nowhere to go]for too long.PIP NOW!
DW
"Bernie was threatened, or so says Assange."
there seems to be a question about this claim. small point.
getting my hope up again.
if we can all get moving in same direction...
@irishking Well, I believe it. It's
Well, I believe it. It's either that or he was a sheepdog all along. Nothing else explains his behavior. Besides, we have an email in which Robby Mook says to John Podesta that they have "leverage" over Sanders. "Leverage" doesn't sound like "here's our willing accomplice" it sounds like "we can put the screws to this guy." And in fact, in another email, one of them says "How will we stick the knife in?" (I don't think they mean literally, but that's not how you talk about an ally or willing subordinate).
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
the question is about the Assange quote
went thru this other day with dkmich. meteorman found this-
http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-bernie-sanders-was-threatened/
I know about Mook's remarks.
we have never seen those back tax returns, repeated lies from sanders people on this issue. never cleared up. that's my CT guess.
really don't care why, he left the building at just the wrong moment.
interested to see how he responds to petition on 9-8.
my bet is he won't take it. and double that he won't front a people's party.
Russia! he said that stuff repeatedly. wait & see
interesting note on the efficacy of non violent protest.
an umbrella group could call for mass actions here.
we need to stop milling around & start moving together in one direction.
that's what this move is about, imo.
@irishking really don't care why
really don't care why, he left the building at just the wrong moment.
interested to see how he responds to petition on 9-8.
my bet is he won't take it. and double that he won't front a people's party.
Russia! he said that stuff repeatedly. wait & see
that's the bottom line. And I agree with you.
Actually, if it was a non-lethal threat, I'm assuming it's that stuff with Jane Sanders and the college finances. Not the taxes.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
There may be a mold problem in that beautiful old house.
Sad to say.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Plus, it's been stripped of its copper pipe, wiring crown
molding, and marble fireplaces.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
In Florida, it really isn't a beautiful old house made of good
materials. Haven't had coffee yet, so I can't really come up with an adequate metaphor for what it is in Florida, but it ain't that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Ooooh - I have a meme for this article
The Republicans and Democrats may differ on social issues, but when it comes to money (and more of it for the oligarchs,) the Republicans and Democrats have a secret love for each other.
The DNC is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Most people don't realize this (including me until recently) but the purpose of DraftBernie.org is not necessarily to get Bernie to run for President as an Independent. It's to get Bernie to help us start a new party.
David Doel of The Rational National made this same mistake and corrected himself later in this video at the 0:54 mark.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U0sFOTPBrM&feature=youtu.be&t=54s width:500]
He reads part of an email he received from R.J. Mastro from the Colorado Chapter of DraftBernie.org.
That's not to say that Bernie wouldn't run, but its really about getting a new party started.
Sounds like another veal pen alrighty.
Sanders is an imperialist, what is with the continued infatuation? I suppose it's because of disaffected democrats still pissed off he lost to Clinton and there's just no one else to turn to in the dem party. This is just the same old thing, another democratic party controlled effort to keep people in the political system instead of forming an independent lower class movement.
".. is an imperialist, what is with the continued infatuation"
these people are putting the question to him.
I believe he will cold shoulder them.
maybe some diehard fans will let go then.
In thinking politically --
we must take history into account. "Another Democratic Party" would be another 200-year-old political party. Au contraire, the "independent lower class movement" voted for Trump last year.
It goes back to the question I asked above. Do we have the right premises?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
Right premises?
Not sure I understand that. I can understand why Brana wants Sanders as the head, it's probably the only way it would work. But Sanders ain't gonna do it. So that alone probably kills it.
Yeah.
Premises are important, so let's start from the beginning. What do you want to see happen?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
Little old me?
I want to see a change in this political system so we have a chance. It's a global problem so I'd like to see a national/international working people's/lower class movement focusing on democracy and taking down oligarchy/plutocracy. I think, as many do, that as long as people keep fucking around in this political system, especially with the duopoly but third party as well, we'll keep losing ground to the super rich. I think it's time to go for it, not mess around with more failed attempts at trying to play their game.
OK so how do you want to get --
from here to there?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
We need to find the Holy Grail Cass.
It's the only way.
[video:https://youtu.be/8przKtIU-0s]
To add,
It's best to discuss this with people who agree with you and/or are receptive to the idea.
I've brought it up many times on this site and there's not much interest in discussing it. I think there's more interest in third party and dem party reformation as opposed to something this radical. I mean, basically we're talking revolution.
I have found the WorldSocialist website promotes and discusses this type of approach however.
So how --
is the revolution going to come about?
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
Trying to bait me?
I know you don't agree, so why the questions?
It might help your goals
if you had an answer, rather than merely a presumption that I disagree with you.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
My take?
There may not be much interest in discussing it, or ability to frame things outside of a possible third party, because it's difficult to see the way forward. Our only context is the current system, and revolution -- which, I agree with you, is the only way anything will change -- honestly seems impossible. They'd simply wipe us all out.
What's left? It's depressing.
@Cassiodorus [INSERT John
[INSERT John Lennon accent here] "That's sort of the question then, isn't it?"
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cassiodorus Violent
Violent revolution clearly won't work, unless the aim is to go down swinging no matter the consequences. Electoral solutions won't work either, which is why I wouldn't get behind creating a third party. I think most people who recognize the need for a third party also recognize the problem with founding one: the legal and political system are so fraudulent you can't get anywhere with a third party. Unless the party you're founding is the Black Panthers. Or maybe Sinn Fein.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
"Electoral solutions won't work either"
I have seen you make this statement several times.
If you cross off violence & electoral politics, what's left?
We have big problems which must be addressed quickly.
A free lunch program for neighborhood kids is of a different order of magnitude.
I am not disputing with you.
But if you want me to cross off electoral politics, I need to see more than this.
I think we must have a coalition party, perhaps coming from the september meeting of tribes.
Find a way to get our candidates on the ballot. Perhaps green party will cooperate.
We need an option to dem candidates , so we can tell them never again & finish them off without committing suicide. There is populist feeling all over the country.
Yes to mass demonstations & action, but congress is where the power lies.
You have to get your hands on the levers= people do not want to overturn the constitution.
Got to get moving in one direction pronto, imo.
thx.
The futility of working within the electoral system
was evidenced by the fraud The Democratic Party perpetrated during the primaries, the media's collusion with that political party, and finally, the nail that sealed the coffin: President Obama's appointment of the Department of Homeland Security to oversee future elections by "monitoring" our entire electoral system.
https://caucus99percent.com/content/it-happened-end-game-russia-hacking-...
Put a fork in "our" electoral process. It's done.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I agree Dems are dead to us.
but a party which united people on common ground could win.
of course tptb want us to give up- the congress will still be elected.
the show will go on.
if you give up on electoral system entirely, what is left to us?
What is left to us?
Us. Me, you, We the People.
Electing politicians to make OUR decisions for us isn't the only option human beings have.
I refuse to believe that.
How would any party running against
.
The establishment win? Through a fraudulent system where the establishment purges our registrations, changes the rules for their benefit, and flips votes in crucial districts? How exactly do we fight against that when they control the electoral system?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
that is the question. (++)
the degree to which they control the electoral system is not really known.
the Sanders movement scared hell out of them,and their cheating has been exposed.
you seem to assume that we have no chance to swing an election, but surely we can do..
what?
I appear to have more confidence in the peoples ability to rise than you do.
believe in the people all you want,but we must have an achievable common goal.
without that you get aimless milling around & sloganeering which don't do much.
thx. we are on the same side here, imo.
The degree to which they control the system
Was evidenced in last years election. So my question is how you suppose a third party will fight against the same party apparatus that rigged local polling places in areas that were strategically significant for them? Or the same power players who hired hackers to flip the votes in those trustworthy election machines? Or how about those paid-for-mercenaries who manipulated the voter databases and all the other information technology they appropriated to decapitate the levers of democracy we tried to use? Ok so maybe we could combat election fraud after the fact through independent audits? Oops, can't do that, the Department of Homeland Security oversees all of that now.
Respectfully, I don't mean to be argumentative but my lack of confidence is not in the people who want change. I believe the people can rally behind an idea and against incredible odds form a viable third party. But then what? To win in a national campaign they will have to fight against an entrenched power whose fraud is out in the open and they don't care anymore. Because, really, what avenues are left for us to fight them?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
We might try, y'know...
actually contesting election fraud when it happens, or something like that.
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
Yes, that's true
We could try. How do you suppose contesting fraud within a system that the people perpetrating the fraud control too would turn out for us?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Well the only people contesting the fraud
in 2000 and 2004 were outside of the duopoly: the Greens and Libertarians. If anything this serves as a good reason to quit the duopoly and join a competing partisan organization of some sort (note how I don't use the "third party" pejorative).
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
@irishking Zoebear
Zoebear got to answering before I did. They can fraudulently install anybody they want---almost.
Apparently something went wrong on the trip to the Hillary coronation, but I don't think it was voting that caused the problem. We've already seen from both of the Bush general elections and the Democratic primary last year that they can, through various means, make the outcome of the vote whatever they want it to be.
I suspect what went wrong was there were actually some people countering the pro-Hillary hacking with some more effective pro-Trump hacking of their own, but I don't know. The only other explanation would be that she and hers were so smugly certain of their win that they didn't bother cheating.
But the Bushes have proved--and Hillary proved in the primary last year--that they can cheat without consequences, and the results will be allowed to stand.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
over and over you dismiss anything resembling
"normal" political participation, but i've yet to see you articulate any alternative that will:
A. Be effective in changing things for the better
and at the same time
B. Avoid a bloody civil war in which 10 to 20 million or more Americans are killed.
And that's only about the matter of making the change happen. I've similarly never seen you articulate even the sketch of a plan for how a technologically modern society of 350,000,000 people is supposed to function without an elaborate system of representative government by which decisions of public policy are debated and implemented.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Well, if this is a place for "normal political participation",
then I guess I should get my ass out of here.
Btw, I have written essays describing what I think should be done and how, but you must have missed it. I would link it but my guess it wouldn't matter.
Is there some reason you feel "this" needs to be "a" place
for any one specific thing? We all know that you want to dynamite the political system, but do you really need to interrupt every discussion in which people who disagree with you on that point are trying to work out strategy and tactics for accomplishing progress within the current framework? Your contempt for everybody who ever tried to get something done without first burning the Capitol to the ground isn't just tiresome, it's condescending and more than a little insulting.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Hey look,
why not give me an example and let's see if I was wrong. I and others on this site, of which I was an original member, are sick of politics as usual including all the faux left attempts at steering people into the dead end elect politicians bullshit. As you can see by my original comment upthread, I got 12 rec's, so I know I'm not alone on here relative to rejecting ANY oligarchy controlled efforts at keeping people from busting out. It may not be the prevailing opinion at "this" place, but there are those that agree with me. So take your own condescending insults and stop reading what I post if you don't like it.
Disagree.
I don't read Al's participation as contemptuous. I believe he's trying to remind us of the futility of working within the current system. We're all struggling with what to do and the more we challenge our assumptions, the better.
Al, I would hate to see you leave. Perhaps that's just me.
CSTMS - you may be onto something with Sinn Fein. Perhaps the right balance between exerting influence from within the system and outright revolution. Hmm.
I'm not asking anyone to leave anywhere.
I'm wondering about the utility of what I perceive as condescending dismissal of those who are looking for ways to accomplish progress now, rather than in some indefinite sometime when some sort of revolutionary remaking of the entire political system has enabled a different approach.
If BA wants to drive a series of dialogues about how to bring about that revolution, I think that's great. I won't participate, because I think it hasn't a hope in hell of happening within this century, but I won't go into those conversations telling everyone they're wasting their time, because whether I'm right or wrong (and I'm hardly infallible -- e.g., I really didn't think Trump would be able to win the GOP nomination) it's not for me to tell people how to prioritize their political activity.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
@WaterLily
I'll bet that I'm far from the only echo in this place!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
remind us of the futility of working within the current system.
.
1.this "futility" is not proved.
2. nothing better is proposed.
I used to listen to guys say " burn the mf-er down!"
that was all they said. all the time.
they were useless, imo.
@WaterLily The Black
The Black Panthers might have more to teach, since they have worked on this continent, in this culture. But something like that, I'd get involved with. But I won't get involved with anything that has an exclusively electoral focus.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I am glad some among the youngsters are doing something!
My generation, including Sanders, whom I greatly admire, needs to be excluded from all leadership positions forthwith. Sanders should be treated as what he is, an honored elder, who is the product of his times and does not realize how conditions have changed.
I would remind anyone concerned that 55% in polls does not necessarily become 55% in the voting booth.
To transform public support into votes I would suggest that you need a compelling platform and message. A fawning reporter once tried to compliment then Gov. the late Mario Cuomo about his speaking style and he said it's not about "the poetry", it's about the message. All men are brothers, he said, that's a compelling message.
Here are my suggestions for what such a platform and message might include.
1. A new party MUST be an anti-imperialist, anti war party.
2. Medicare for all, or, I think, a National Health Service with clinics in every neighborhood open to all comers, irrespective of income and status, for at least basic care. Plenty of jobs in a NHS, which might address the but that's our jobs opposition to extending Medicare.
2. Tax on Wall Street speculation. I have to pay sales tax, how come Soros doesn't? Maybe some exclusions for one time sales of stock to finance a college education or the like.
3. Restore agriculture commodity price supports and ceilings. Unlike the current system of various subsidies and federal insurance, price supports and ceilings DON'T COST THE TAXPAYER A DIME. What they do is give farmers a guaranteed minimum price and keep irresponsible speculation out of the commodity markets--so Wall Street players can't deliberately run up the cost of milk or grain, for example.
4. Back in the early 70s, Daniel Moynihan, who was then working in the Republican administration, convinced President Nixon to propose a guaranteed income or negative income tax, to replace the patchwork of programs like welfare and so on. Nixon had grown up in poverty and he understood the humiliation of having to beg for help for a suffering family. This proposal was shot down by DEMOCRATS, and particularly by THE LEFT, because lefties--that would be my generation, not all of you reading here--coveted jobs and careers in the welfare agencies and I am sure you are all aware of how well those functionaries have done their jobs. For what it might be worth, it has been my observation that social workers are more hated in impoverished communities than are the police.
A couple of additional points:
Get real about immigration. Most of the country hates the influx of people from all over the globe. High levels of immigration simultaneously push up housing prices and costs and push down wages, which benefits you know who, the plutocrats in charge.
The left of my generation couldn't figure out what country they were living in. Most of their ideas came from European social philosophy which, sorry but I think it needs to be said, don't very often apply in the USA. The USA isn't Poland, guys, and the experience of living in even NYC or SF will never resemble the experience of living in Paris or Prague for the simple reason that our cities don't happen to be a thousand years old. The major philosophical and tactical failing of the left of my generation was its urban bias, and I urge you, don't repeat that failing or you may well become similarly irrelevant and politically impotent.
To illustrate what I mean, I point out that there are two areas, besides incessant warmongering, where the right, including the alt-right is vulnerable right now, and leftists are for the most part ignoring both.
The first is the Trump assault on public lands--that's where regular guys and gals, the Trump base, in case you forgot, goes fishing, hunting, camping and hiking. The Trump base does not want to have to be friends with some plutocrat to be able to continue those recreations. Pace the fantasies of people like Webster Tarpley, neither large scale agriculture nor large industrialization is possible west of about the 100th parallel. Most of the western states are in fact desert, and managed mixed use is the best disposition of these lands. Industrialization needs massive amounts of fresh water. Please note that areas famous for industry always are places where there are large rivers and plentiful rainfall, like Ukraine or the Rhine valley or the Mid-Atlantic states. And, in case anyone is entertaining the delusion that the population of Israel can be transplanted to Utah, Not Going To Happen, guys.
A second area of rightist vulnerability is the increasing toxicity of our food supply. Nice conservatives who might yawn and change the subject when you bring up GMOs and pesticides are finding that toxic foods are seriously undermining the health of their families, especially children. Do I need to remind you how good these folks, especially the women, are at social activism? A message of we might disagree on some things but we are wholly committed to your children's health can't we work together on this could go along way towards to getting at least a hearing from people who might otherwise simply change the channel.
Mary Bennett
I'll see it when I believe it
I'll see it when I believe it
@eState4Column5
Are you planning to go?
It sounds like a good scene if you can make it there. (I'll go to one when they hold it in California...)
“The Democrats and Republicans want you to believe they are mortal enemies engaged in a desperate struggle when all the time, they are partners with a power-sharing agreement.” - Richard Moser
good job LSM ,BERNIE WON was
good job LSM ,BERNIE WON was great!
DW