Postmodern progressives
The left has never been welcome in the Republican party; and since the neoliberal Clinton machine showed up, they have not been welcome in the Democratic party either. As Clinton debauched the historical, FDR/JFK/LBJ meaning of the word "liberal", the left started calling itself "progressives". The left had long been the grassroots of the Democratic party; and after being left in the lurch by John Kerry (no lawsuits against Ohio fraud), lied to by Barack Obama, and browbeaten by the increasingly neocon Clintonite DNC, they enthusiastically coalesced around Bernie Sanders.
If our political system were honest, Bernie Sanders would have been the Democratic nominee; and Hillary Clinton and Debbie W-S (of Aman Brothers infamy) would be on trial for violating national security and corrupting the DNC. But, our political system isn't honest. Our political system, including the Democratic party, is completely bought and paid for. And, unfortunately, Bernie Sanders - despite being a victim of that corruption - continues to refuse to make that point. He refused to join the lawsuit (complete with dead process server and suspicious phone call from DWS's office) against the DNC. All in the name of working within a party he does not even belong to.
After the 2016 election, the DNC, continuing its corrupt ways, blatantly favored Tom Perez over the "progressive" Keith Ellison, smearing Ellison as a Moslem lover. Bernie's reaction to this continuing manipulation was muted. On foreign policy, Bernie continues to be either AWOL or pro-MIC (F-35 plant in VT)/pro-Israel. These are not progressive positiions. AFAIAC, Bernie is half a leftist. He is left on economics and social policy; but he is rightwing on the MIC, foreign policy, and Israel. There is very little democracy left in this country, and I am not going to waste my time supporting Bernie, who has shown himself to be a sheepdog. That's my take on the 2018 version of Bernie. I will always treasure the early 2016 version of Bernie, the only political candidate in my life that I gave serious money to.
Neither will I waste my time pretending that honest, inside-the-system efforts can take the Democratic party back from the plutocrats who own it, lock, stock, and checkbook. You might think there is a chance to work inside the system. You might think the DNC is vulnerable because it learned nothing from the 2016 debacle; but you would be wrong. After the Hillary debacle, they have learned how to manufacture more credible fake progressives.
------
For it seems that progressive candidates aren’t the only ones who learned the lesson of Bernie Sanders in 2016; the neoliberal Clintonites have too. So, while left-wing campaigns crop up in every corner of the country, so too do astroturf faux-progressive campaigns. And it is for us on the left to parse through it all and separate the authentic from the frauds.
One candidate currently generating some buzz in the race is Jeff Beals, a self-identified “Bernie democrat” whose campaign website homepage describes him as a “local teacher and former U.S. diplomat endorsed by the national organization of former Bernie Sanders staffers, the Justice Democrats.” And indeed, Beals centers his progressive bona fides to brand himself as one of the inheritors of the progressive torch lit by Sanders in 2016. A smart political move, to be sure. But is it true?
By his own admission, Beals’ overseas career began as an intelligence officer with the CIA. His fluency in Arabic and knowledge of the region made him an obvious choice to be an intelligence spook during the latter stages of the Clinton Administration.
Beals was not a soldier unwillingly drafted into service, but an intelligence officer who voluntarily accepted an influential and critically important post for the Bush Administration in its ever-expanding crime against humanity in Iraq.
Moreover, no one who knows anything about the Iraq War could possibly swallow the tripe that CIA/State Department officials in Iraq were “looking to help our country find a way out” a year into the war. A year into the war, the bloodletting was only just beginning, and Halliburton, Exxon-Mobil, and the other corporate vultures had yet to fully exploit the country and make billions off it. So, unfortunately for Beals, the historical memory of the anti-war Left is not that short.
How Clintonites Are Manufacturing Faux Progressive Congressional Campaigns
The takeaway here is that many of these self-declared "Bernie Democrats" are, in reality, the "CIA Democrats" that we have been warned about. And Bernie has not called them out. Another thing he has not called out is the fact that the party leadership is still blatantly sabotaging even modestly "progressive" candidates in the primaries.
In the latest striking example of how the Democratic Party resorts to cronyism (and perhaps corruption) to ensure that its favored candidates beat back progressive challengers in local races, a candidate for Colorado's 6th Congressional District has leaked a recording of a conversation with Minority Leader Steny Hoyer to The Intercept which published it overnight. In it, Hoyer can be heard essentially lecturing the candidate about why he should step aside and let the Democratic Party bosses - who of course have a better idea about which candidate will prevail over a popular Republican in the general election - continue pulling the strings.
The candidate, Levi Tillemann, is hardly a party outsider. Tillemann had grandparents on both sides of his family who were elected Democratic representatives, and his family is essentially Democratic Party royalty.Still, the party's campaign arm - the notorious Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (better known as the DCCC, or D-trip) - refused to provide Tillemann with access to party campaign data or any of the other resources he requested.
Secret Recording Reveals Democratic Party Boss Ordering Progressive Candidate To Quit Race
Here is yet another thing that Bernie has not called out: The DNC, which is reportedly badly behind in fundraising, is nevertheless willing to spend obscene amounts of money in primaries just to keep progressives out of races - even Red district races that are guaranteed losses for Democrats.
Dan Feehan has successfully bought the Democratic nomination for Minnesota’s first congressional district (MN-CD1). Dan, having lived outside the state since the age of 14, has allegedly misled the public on his FEC form, claiming residence at his cousin’s address. Here is Dan’s FEC filing form. One can see that it his cousin who lives at this address...
Mr. Feehan has no chance to win in November. While nobody likes a candidate from Washington D.C., people hate Washington money even more. To be fair to Dan he hasn’t taken super PAC money, somehow. But he has raised 565,000 dollars, an outrageous sum for a congressional race. 94% of this money has come from outside the district, and 79% from outside the state. Where does this money come from? Well, according to the campaign, from people around the country who want to keep Minnesota blue. If this was the case, why not wait to give money until Minnesota voted for a candidate in the primary and then donate? And who on earth has this much money to pour into an obscure race outside of their state?
Dan Feehan is of the same breed that most post-Trump Democrats are. Clean cut, military experience, stern, anti-gun, anti-crazy Orange monsters, anti-negativity, and anti-discrimination of rich people who fall under a marginalized group. What are they for? No one knows. If pushed they want “good” education, health care, jobs, environment, etc. But they want Big money too for various reasons, but the ones cited are: because that is the only way to win, because rich people are smart and poor people are dumb, and because money is speech. So they cannot and will not make any concrete commitments. Hence energy becomes “all inclusive”, as if balancing clean and dirty energy was a college admissions department diversity issue, rather than a question of life or death for the entire planet. Healthcare becomes not a right, but a requirement with a giant handout to insurance companies. Near full employment (with the near being very important, when we consider leverage) comes with part-time, short-term, and low paying work.
The Clintonite Democrats and their spawn are postmodern progressives. In their world, there is no way to test if one is progressive. Within the world of the Democratic party, there is no relativity. It is merely a universe that exists only to clash with (but mostly submit to) the parallel Republican universe. Whoever proves to be the victor should be united behind without a thought given to their place within the political spectrum of Democrat voters. They believe, if I were to paraphrase René Descartes: “I Democrat, therefore I progressive.”
Tell me again why I must be a loyal Democrat, why I must support candidates who are corporate/MIC shills, why I must submit to the constant harassment and sabotage of progressive efforts. Tell me again how Bernie is fighting the party leadership. (That is, explain away all the non-activity related to the items posted above.)
I'm with Chris Hedges. Formal democracy is dead in the US; all we have left are actions in the streets (and those are being slowly made illegal). The only people in this country who deserve my support are: 1) the striking teachers, many of them non-unionized, 2) the oil pipeline protestors, who are being crushed by police state tactics, 3) the fighters for $15 minimum wage, again non-unionized. The Democratic Party used to stand for unions. It doesn't any more. It doesn't stand for anything except getting more money from the 1% to sell out the 99% with fake progressive CIA candidates. Oh, and it stands for pussy hats.
Anyone who tells me to get in line behind Bernie is either a naive pollyana or a disingenuous purity troll.
Comments
We have all been here before. 1948.
That was the year that the clawback of the Democratic Party and the purge of the Left was formalized. It really dates to the engineered hijacking of the nomination of Henry Wallace at the 1944 Democratic Convention. History does repeat itself for those who didn't learn or weren't adequately taught it.
I appreciate being reminded of the history...
however tragic it is. Instead of a true leftwinger, we got Harry Truman, a naive wardheeler from corrupt Kansas City. He was led by the nose to create the CIA.
I do take your point; but the question is, can anything be done? If democracy has become meaningless kabuki, and the neocon warmongers are in charge no matter whom we "elect", what is there to do besides build that bomb shelter?
That is why I say that only genuine issues will galvanize the public; and even then, they can run a hybrid war against the left. They have created this ludicrous Identity Politics boogeyman that energizes the right and makes the postmodern progressives look stupid. No matter what tactic I think of, TPTB have already covered that base. The problem is that the left has absolutely no base in the U.S. today.
The post-modern progressives are stupid
They are not progressive. They do not have a platform (except "I anti-Trump, therefore I progressive".
How will the pseudo-progressives be able to justify being both "progressive" and pro-war?
Talk about cognitive dissonance. But wait. Democraps of any stripe, don't cogitate, hence no dissonance.
Appreciate you posting this essay
This is only one of the many troubling signs which convince me he is being controlled by my enemy.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Thanks for the essay, arendt
I came to this site in the great purge at daily kos, and I was truly fired up about Bernie Sanders at that time. I’ve come a very long ways since then. Thanks to the people here.
And to kos, who now rather infamously said “if you think Hillary Clinton can’t beat Donald Trump, you’re a fucking moron. Seriously, you’re dumb as rocks.” And he said if you’re not going to cheerlead for democrats, “go the fuck away. This is not your place.” True words!!
So this site was here and Bernie supporters flocked here. Including me. But over this time I have seen the mistakes I made. Such a lot of wasted time and energy.
Still searching for answers myself, but I know what doesn’t work, and how important for the status quo to keep the illusion of democracy alive. But more and more people are not buying it anymore. I suspect that a few more crumbs will be forthcoming on some issues. That’s the very best way to keep the show going. And the show must go on.
Pulling back the curtain is really the first and most important weapon we have. Thank you for doing that.
Whose dumb as rocks now?
Countered with Russia, Russia, Russia. God he was such a prick.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Was?
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Lol
I don't go over there anymore, so thankfully he is in the past tense.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
"important for the SQ to keep the illusion of democracy alive"
That's how I feel about it. I've been suckered one time too many. The 2016 election was a complete farce. Bernie was sabotaged. The DNC and Hillary broke their own rules to do it. But Bernie, with a perfect opportunity and lots of support, just walked away from the fight that he had promised his people.
Sheep dog.
TPTB want the political "fight" to be between slightly different flavors of neoliberal looting/neocon warmongering. They want unions, teachers, environmentalists, and minorities to, in the words of a UK asshole, "shut up and go away".
The CIA literally paid $600M to the Washington Post, whose purchase price was only $300M. Bezos made 200% of his money back in a month. The media is completely corporatized; and they are coming for the internet with censorship. Where is Bernie on this? Haven't heard a word.
Sheep dog.
As TPTB simply buy what is left of the Democratic party, they will enforce this kabuki politics. Any deviation will be labeled Putin-loving, Assad-loving, China-loving, etc.
You can't have a democracy when free speech is instantly labeled fake news or enemy propaganda.
I think this is the gist of people who don't care for Bernie
"I was truly fired up about Bernie Sanders at that time. I’ve come a very long ways since then."
This is how I see the way some people feel about him. This same thing happened after I voted for Obama. I thought that he would do what "I heard him say that he would", but he let me down by not even bothering to try doing anything.
What soured me on Bernie was his saying that Her won the election fair and square after everything we saw happen. Even after learning how the primary was rigged against him. And now he has jumped on the Russian interference propaganda train when he knows that Russia had no hand with Trump beating Her out the presidency.
Bottom line is that I no longer believe that Bernie is being up front with me. I know that others feel differently, but remember how people changed their minds on Obama and never accepted Herheinous! People should be free here to say how they feel.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Obama was the template.
I don't trust the Justice Dems as far as I can throw them. DailyKos indoctrinated us for 10 years with more and better. It is all bull shit.
Bernie also lied to us. "He is in it to win it" - as long as he doesn't piss off the Clintons and Obama.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I don't folllow all the BS. Who are the "justice" dems?
Purportedly Bernie? Perportedly Obama?
I just don't care. The Democratic Party is dead to me. I had a wake a while back.
Berniecrats that want to work from within just like Bernie does
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Democrats
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
The Obomber template has been exported
Don't you think Trudeau and Macron seem to be cut from an Obama cloth?
Would that we had a Corbyn in the US. At lest he request evidence before bombing and ejecting diplomats.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
by and large i agree w/ your positions, with leveymg's
slight corrections, and i'm glad you read at the intercept so we don't have to.
but i'd asked big al if jeff beals were on the berniecrat's list, but as it turned out one had to click into the 'share your Act Blue donation with...' tab. if he'd said yes, i'd have given part of eric draitser's take (even though he's another 'progressive save for assad'-ist at counterpunch. pffft.
now here's the list of candidates from 'our revolution', not the designation beals had virtue-signaling/pandering claimed 'approved by x, y, zed'... that draitser exposed at length, and only two of them were being funded by Act Blue contributions. but as far as i can make out, none of the ones draitser named from the wsws CIA dems...are on the list. here is a compilation of all three parts of their exposé if anyone cares to check them against the our revolution list. not that i'd think for a milwaukee minute that the sir 'progressives must learn to support zionism' 'amerika should have the strongest military in the world' bernie would care.
i sure don't. but i've been trying to weave a post together in my lamus brainus w/ friends of amerika saudi arabia, israel, john bolton, macron, mutti merkel (the iranian nuclear treaty) the western pathology...together.
anyhoo, good job, arendt, and thanks.
on later edit: i'd totally forgotten to check under 'our revolutions' Issues tab; sections on the left sidebar, and here's the Military (FP?) one. too many weasel-words and formulations to feature, but the 'fighting terrorism' one's a dilly.
I get the sense of your post, but the details escape me.
Thanks for your comment.
I just can't parse this. Are you saying Draitser is incorrect? wsws is incorrect? Whose 3-part expose? Do these details really matter? (Except insofar as we know which "leftists" are still trustworthy.) We know the CIA Dems are there, regardless of how many lies they tell.
can't see why you aren't following my comment.
your take was that draitser was implying that ALL of the CIA dems that wsws had dug into are bernistas via their resumés was not correct, imo (even knowing you firmly dislike those trotskyites (smile), even never quite grasping your charges leveled against them). 'our revolution' candidates, according to many interview with whats-her-name turner' show at TRNN (on edit: nina turner, as here, no transcript 115 comments to steer by instead.
they a are the actual bernistas, not the Act Blue ones big al had linked to. at least as far as i can tell. i provided all three parts of wsws's exposé if some cared to check the names to if any of them are actually 'our revolutionists'. it made me crazy trying to do so, even with draitser's list. i'm just trying to keep to what's so, what might not be so is all.
and OR's fP issues is open to satirizing as soooo open to wide berth interpretation.
not quite
I thought u were only questioning ID of Beal as liar. Not all in Drainer list.
Too hard to explain on phone.
Becuz, what other choice
do you have? We have? Sit out the elections? Vote Green? Working Families Party? Go rogue?
Big Al pretty much suggests the same thing for the same reasons. But our better choice is to call out the bull$h!t. They're flooding elections with faux progressive CIA candidates? Smoke them out and call them out. It ain't up to Bernie to monitor who's who. The heavy lifting has to be done by we, the people. That was Bernie's message. "Not me, us." It's up to us to sniff them out and call them out.
It's obvious there's a War on Progressives. We either choose to fight it or not. I know! It shouldn't have to be this hard. And if we had a real party it wouldn't be. But we don't. We no longer have a real party. So, our options are.... Mine are to continue to fight both inside and outside the party. your mileage may vary.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
That's a very positive suggestion.
I don't have to identify as anything except anti-war, anti-CIA/Deep State to do that. Skip the whole Bernie/not Bernie fight.
I looked at one of the "CIA Dem" lists, and I didn't see many candidates in New England. IIRC, there might have been one in NH. But, I could always start pestering friends who live in CIA Dem districts in far away places.
Good suggestion.
"Skip the whole Bernie/not Bernie fight."
That's the most constructive thing I've read all day. Followed by:
"I could always start pestering friends who live in CIA Dem districts in far away places.
Good suggestion."
Berniecrat is also another language.
Being bi-lingual, so to speak, helps some people understand the application of your argument.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
We can call them out
With out being co-opted into a corrupted electoral process.
Starve. The. Beast.
Let the participation %'s dip to single digits and see how the power structure keeps up the masquerade of convincing the world that we have a functioning democracy. In that space is where I believe we have the best opportunity to disrupt the status quo.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Vote third party.
I agree about starving the duopoly. But, if there is to be any genuine oppositon, there must be a vehicle for it.
To not vote at all is to reinforce the phony, corporate narrative that Americans just don't care. Americans care. They cared about the lying phoney Obama in 2008; they cared about Bernie in 2016. Then they went all "ghost dance" on Trump.
The problem is, after decades of trying, no one (except another egomaniac billionaire, Ross Perot) can break the duopoly. The Greens can't get 1%. The Libertarians either. Still, I would vote for Greens with a clear conscience. That Ajamu Baraka guy was at least a bombthrower. (Too bad his name was so similar to Barack.)
Since they control the entire electoral process
That includes voting for third parties. You're right when you say we need a vehicle for dissent, but why get into one when they are in the drivers seat?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Absoluitely! 100%
Don't let them say you don't care. Don't let them say you're too busy with social media to vote.
If you have no choices, write in one (only if there isn't a choice even a no hope choice). In Illinois it will spoil your ballot but they can't say you were too unaffected to show up or didn't care.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
So we are going to kick Lucy's football
Down the road and enable those corrupting the system because we are worried that someone will wag their fingers at us and falsely accuse us of not caring or being too lazy?
.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
So we are going to ignore voting?
And strengthen out enemies? The fewer people that vote, the easier it is for them to get elected using their army of the faithful (TOP), payrollers, and flat out cheating. Nearly half the eligible voters didn't vote for President. I think they were disgusted with their choices. They say you either didn't care or were too busy.
You can withdraw in purity, but you are just making it easier for the elites to control the elections.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Withdrawing in "purity"
Isn't making it "easier" for them to cheat when they are already doing that. What participating in their corruption does do is keep the illusion of democracy alive for their benefit. Easier? They're already achieving their end game. Controlling us, electing their candidates, and collecting our taxes.
Frankly we've been participating in their potemkin village passing as democracy for decades with no effect.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
No, that’s not what it means
First, a boycott is not “ignoring” voting. It’s an organized protest against fake elections. It’s actually not that uncommon for people in other countries to call for election boycotts in protest when a significant portion of people feel the election is staged or rigged with a predetermined outcome, or where all of the candidates are chosen by the elite so none represent the will of the people.
In that type of situation, boycotting the election — and obviously that means saying why, and making a protest out of it — is really the only recourse people have. It may not be effective at stopping the fake election, but it lets the world know the vote was fake.
If you line up to go obediently cast your vote anyway, then you are the one who is empowering the enemy, by giving the illusion of legitimacy to the fake vote.
Now about this big worry about what “they” will say... first, look at what they already say about third party voters. In the media and political world, third party voters are a joke, useful idiots, who can be simultaneously written off as “fringe” wackos who can and should be ignored, and also childish spoilers who can be scapegoated and blamed for eternity for election loses. Witness Ralph Nader and Jill Stein. Of course people should still vote third party if there’s someone that truly represents them, and if they believe the election process is genuine. Because you don’t let your voting choices be dictated by what the powers that be say about it!
For those of us who believe the election process is a sham and a scam, voting is playing into their hands, giving legitimacy to their show. That is what makes it easier for them to keep the status quo firmly in place, and is literally helping them do it.
As has been pointed out, if an organized protest/boycott that called the elections fake were to take root and grow, they would not be able to say we don’t care. That’s a big if, obviously, but it’s better than playing your assigned role in The Voting Show. Because that show is what everyone points to as proof that the American people want this fucked up warmongering government we keep voting back into power every two years.
Enough is enough. One of Bernie’s slogans, which I still agree with.
Let's leave voting to the Tea Party.
We'll have our integrity and, since the parties are identical, policy won't change anyway.
The Tea Party?
Whatever happened to the Tea Party? It died last night
Looks like you might be right, the outcomes don’t change much.
It also looks like the tea party might be ripe for joining the boycott however. They “won” and then didn’t get what they voted for. Sounds familiar. Maybe they see the charade now too.
@CS in AZ
The Tea Party is alive and well, they are now known as the Trump base. All those xenophobic, racist white men just found a new hero to foam at the mouth with. They took over the GOP, not with down ballot wins but with the Presidency.
Since your question wasn't sincere
I'm assuming you're not expecting my answer to be either?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Not voting at all can be that third party.
For a voting boycott to work, it would have to be organized along the lines of a third party, with a platform and members, but it wouldn't be about electing politicians to compete in Congress. It would be to join together millions of voices for political power. It would be to force change, just like other boycotts.
If it's an organized boycott with specific and stated goals, "they" wouldn't be able to say it's apathy. If it's done silently, yes, then it doesn't do any good. Not yet anyway.
One way or another, the goal has to be to organize millions of people to oppose the duopoly and demand change to this political system. An independent movement outside the election system seems better to me than a third party because a third party would take decades to build the power in Congress by trying to electing politicians.
Hw about an organized "None Of The Above"?
Would that be a clear enough message?
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Something like that.
I think joe had a essay at one time about the Nobody Party.
"Vote for Nobody".
Yes, it would.
Boycotting the election is like refusing to cash your paycheck because you don't get paid a fair wage. It's not like a strike. They don't need your vote like your company needs your labor. They only need 50%+1 of those who do vote. And there will always be someone voting. The true believers and those whose economic interest is tied to the current incumbents.
Do you think it will embarrass them? Ha! Ha! Ha! They will just tell each other jokes about the stupid Progressives.
A voter boycott is like a little kid holding his breath until he turns blue.
Are you a shill trying to get Progressives to not vote so that Centrists (neo-fascists) have an easier time getting elected?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
But who is there to vote FOR
The DCCC has been kneecapping progressive candidates for years. There is practically zero coverage of primaries in the corporate media. Hence, it all comes down to who has the most money to spend on canned ads, focus groups, pictures of Biff, Muffy, the 2.3 kids and the dog. And when it comes to money, the corpo Dems have it all. That's why when some DINO squeaks by some exceptionally obnoxious Trumpite in a Red district, the corpo dems blanket the TV machine with their meme: only centrist Dems can beat Trump. (Which of course contradicts their other meme, that we should vote for their fake progressives.)
Meanwhile, these fake progressives have succeeded in muddying the waters. Is this guy/girl a genuine progressive? Or are they a CIA Dem? You have to dig past the glossy surface of the carefully crafted bio. Since any awake person no longer trusts the party (or operations like Our Revolution) to be honest, one must wade through dozens of emails about candidates to separate the progressive wheat from the corporate chaff. Not many people have time for that, which is why genuine progressives have low name recognition.
The public is too preoccupied with surviving to notice primaries. Primaries are to politics what spring training is to baseball: only the fanatics care really care about it. And yet, for progressives, the primaries are the entire season. Lose in the primaries, and be faced with a "hung or shot" choice in November.
I am not hopeful. I think the only focus we can have is to harp on the excessive military/deep state background of the fake progressives. To ask them whether they will curtail the military. Offer them a chance to say they would vote against Trump's massive increase in the already obscene military budget. Offer them a chance to reduce the number of overseas bases. Ask them to justify their work ruining and looting Iraq, Libya, etc.
The public is sick of endless war, out of control military budgets, and a foreign policy that consists solely of bombing and sanctions and sponsoring terrorists.
Thats why I said to write-in
if there isn't anyone. Elmer Fudd, Bernie Sanders, Franklin Roosevelt. It doesn't matter. It shows you refuse to support any of the listed candidates but are NOT indifferent to the election.
Actually organizing around a single name (living or dead) would be a way better protest than just staying home.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Wrong analogy
With a paycheck you actually do receive something for your labor. With voting you receive nothing.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
You receive a new master.
They do vary in malevolence. Sometimes they are not activist. They just want to line their pockets without rocking the boat. That's often better than someone who wants to upturn the boat your riding in.
EDIT: spelling
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
4 Stone Walls and No Trap Door
Depends on how much servitude and corruption a person can tolerate on their tax dollar.
I can't speak to your upturned boat metaphor since I'm not sure what that symbolizes for you in your life. But in my personal experiences, I've always gotten back on shore even after I was sure I would drown, and nearly always expanded my perspectives about my life.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
I hope your luck continues.
Truly. Because I think we are about (10-20 years) to pass through a VERY strait gate.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Amazing: People on this site are . . . .
. . . often asking for concrete programs for change from people (such as yourself) who argue that concentrating on change through the electoral system is a waste of time.
In this post, you pretty much lay one out, and no body even uprates you?
Why is that? Because your "plan" requires too much work? Because people can't wrap their heads around mass movements that work outside the electoral system? Because going the path you advocate will get one on some kind of governmental list of subversives or political enemies?
Why is that exactly? It's almost as if people INSIST that any change that happens in this country politically HAS TO OCCUR THROUGH THE VOTING BOOTH, and cannot conceive of any more effective or meaningful political action to change things.
Sad. Very sad.
Oh, I've been saying the same things for quite some time
but still get scolded for bitching and "carping" but never offering any solutions. I wrote an essay last year detailing this approach. The solutions are out there, this isn't anything new, it's just bigger and badder and what to do about it isn't rocket science, it's hard work. So ya, I think that has something to do with it. It's kind of like stopping war and imperialism, it's hard for people to envision success so they focus on what's in front of them, which in this case, is our world famous democracy of electing politicians to two oligarchy owned political parties.
Then again, there has to be leaders, there has to be people getting together to try to get it going. Most people are followers, that's just the way it is. Without getting coopted in which everything including OWS has been. We need something people can get on board with, something that motivates them to join in. It's like we're waiting for a spark that never comes.
Well there is always treason.
But you won't find me advocating it.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Perhaps something like that
I think at first, it would not serve much other than to illustrate:
1. Millions have no faith, and actually really do desire differently than what/who serves in their U.S. government.
2. Will forgo the charade/farce of the "real" elections, because they want "these things/people," that are outlined in a somewhat formal declaration.
Similar to this, I had a somewhat humorous thought, along these lines (and the famous "write in" memes, where people would occasionally write in Zappa for President). Where, along with this somewhat formal platform of, "outside the system," some technology/servers set up, where people participating could nominate potential candidates...anyone. Then, as part of the "new/lieu" election, simultaneous with the "real" elections, would then proceed to vote, online for these nominees. Potentially hundreds of them. Tally and display results.
My first nominees are:
@Ian56789
The guy accused, on actual TV, Live, of being a Russian bot...do these idiots even know what a 'bot is? Asking a real person, that direct question on-air, shows they are complete, utter, imbeciles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=186&v=00eJTLJGlmQ
Maria Zakharova
Two benefits with her. She is sharp as a whip, shoots down flak like they are paper targets, and lovely dovetails with the Russians taking over...in this case, we are begging for it, because it's so self-evidently superior, LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-EgzOdJ5S8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVoLgD1RIxE
https://rutube.ru/video/c9e4e9722bb5594f8f9f97f95635f0b2/
This kind of thing could go viral (especially the dancing queen/Zakharova), create memes, and we all know how popular that crap is in today's online world, LOL
and what platform do 'We' or'You' have for calling out the BS?
c99? what you and i do in the end will be to vote our consciences, vote out uber-pragmatic 'baby step incrementalism' again, or not vote. i'll vote in the end, but only for a sincerley anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-war candidate. imo, stein's running again w/ her 'breaking my silence on russia gate' silliness, both at counterpunch and TRNN. oh, so beleaguered is she. otoh, i'd vote for her third choice for a running mate ajamu baraka, who meets all three criteria, as far as i can tell.
but on big al's thread, you and a few others reminded me of rebecca solnit's 2012 message in bottle, and look how that turned out 'for the people'.
“O rancid sector of the far left, please stop your grousing!”
Leftists explain things to me:
The poison often emerges around electoral politics. Look, Barack Obama does bad things and I deplore them, though not with a lot of fuss, since they’re hardly a surprise. He sometimes also does not-bad things, and I sometimes mention them in passing, and mentioning them does not negate the reality of the bad things.”
then comes this inscrutable word salad:
“So here I want to lay out an insanely obvious principle that apparently needs clarification. There are bad things and they are bad. There are good things and they are good, even though the bad things are bad. The mentioning of something good does not require the automatic assertion of a bad thing. The good thing might be an interesting avenue to pursue in itself if you want to get anywhere. In that context, the bad thing has all the safety of a dead end. And yes, much in the realm of electoral politics is hideous, but since it also shapes quite a bit of the world, if you want to be political or even informed you have to pay attention to it and maybe even work with it.”
and later:
“There is idealism somewhere under this pile of bile, the pernicious idealism that wants the world to be perfect and is disgruntled that it isn’t – and that it never will be. That’s why the perfect is the enemy of the good. Because, really, people, part of how we are going to thrive in this imperfect moment is through élan, esprit de corps, fierce hope and generous hearts.
We talk about prefigurative politics, the idea that you can embody your goal. This is often discussed as doing your political organising through direct-democratic means, but not as being heroic in your spirit or generous in your gestures.”
bad, good things
Is RS channeling Rumsfeld? Known unknowns, unknown unknowns. Same pseudophilosophical BS.
I'd say more but I'm on a phone.
I'll take my espirit de corps
And challenge the DHS controlled electoral system in a duel at midnight! Mon Dieu!
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Who's Rebecca Solnit?
I've come to hate that term, don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good, when it comes to politics. I only use it when washing dishes and cleaning the bathroom.
@Big Al I've come to hate
Me too. Oh... feels weird saying "me too" now these days.
Anyway, point is that that phrase is meant to squash dissent. That and the "Humans are imperfect" line used as well to describe politicians.
Here's the thing - I'm not looking for perfect. I would accept good. That's the problem though in that the politicians offered aren't "good". They are downright monstrous and awful.
"Look this person butchered over 1 million people, but look at her dancing on stage with Ellen!"
No thanks.
the perfect vs. the good
You are far from alone on that score. Although most issues aren't binary -- grey areas and all that -- there really are some which are binary, where the available options are "yes or no", "with us or against us", etc.
Some examples:
Peace
Imperialism
An economic system that works for everybody
Pregnancy (the classic example)
Death (the other classic example)
and so on.
Any time someone's dragged out that hoary old chestnut "don't let the perfect become the enemy of the good", it means that person's trying to hide not minor peccadilloes, but ginormous honkin' mega-flaws we really should be paying attention to!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Hi t
If perfect means bringing your full consciousness and desire to do your personal best, than I’m all for seeking and supporting perfection. Sincerity is uncompromising. It also helps if we can bring as much self-reflection and honesty to the task.
I can accept others choices that may differ from mine if they are reached from a place of genuine reflection from a humanitarian point of view; whether that involves themselves alone, immediate relationships, or for those beyond our experience. We need to start somewhere, with the opportunities that are within reach.
What platform do you have?
Well, if you start small, I suggest that everyone has at least a small circle of friends or associates that they have access to through e-mail. So, why not, once a week, take it upon yourself to circulate a news item or two that, if taken seriously, completely blows away the conventional wisdom or official propaganda on any particular political topic? I mean, people, you have the internet at your disposal, with truthful and factual information (whether its a broadcast by Jimmy Dore, or an article from the World Socialist Website) only a click away.
In this way, you can start slowly educating people and waking them up to "truth" and "reality."
Will you reach thousands of people? Probably not. Will you reach a few? Probably. And if you do this, some of them, in turn, will wake up others. Slowly, but steadily, one changes consciousness one mind at a time.
I have a good conservative friend that has always voted Republican. The fact is, after months and weeks of sending him quality, trustworthy information (including things from Jimmy Dore, Craig Murray, Zerohedge), he now says to me about BOTH parties, "They don't give a shit about us. They are only out for themselves." He also says, when it comes to the "news" reported by the corporate media, that he doesn't know who to believe anymore, but that he certainly doesn't trust what he hears on TV or reads in the papers.
Will this get single-payer enacted within the next few years? Probably not. But it's a start, because this man no longer sees the political system as representing his interests or as working for him, and he understands that elected politicians have every incentive to play along with their donors, including being rewarded with lucrative jobs if they leave office.
If everyone on this site just woke up two people in this way, that would have a ripple effect.
One of the best ways there is to effect political change, is by changing the consciousness of the average American citizen. My God, people! You have e-mail and the internet at your disposal. You have the tools.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." --Margaret Meade
@wendy davis I ripped up my voter ID
I ripped up my voter ID this year. Not gonna participate in a farce. I debated whether to do it, because local politics can still function (almost) like we're in a republic, but the PTB are taking care of that by defunding local politics and controlling everything through the corrupt state and federal governments.
"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
You are forgetting about the centrists
and the people who will vote for anyone who has a (D) after their name. Or they might like the issues that they are running on. Or they don't know that those candidates have that type of background. The media isn't going to tell them anything about their values and some people are too busy to investigate who they are voting for. This is what the democrats are counting on.
No is saying that it's Bernie's job to smoke them out.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Labor Party
This is why I activize for a viable Labor Party in this country. I fear the Democrats are irretrievable at this point.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Democrats working for "you" - confirming Pompeo.
Sorry for the link to the Intercept.
Most of them are the usual lineup of DINOs, but I was struck by Schumer and Feinstein (she of the famous tussle with the CIA about them bugging her offices). These two are senior leaders of the party, and they vote for this raving warmonger.
The Democratic Party is not worth dogshit; and Bernie can't fix it - even if he tried.
And Sheldon Whitehouse sells himself
as someone who is ethical enough to be aware of global climate breakdown!
Right along with voting yes on more Russian sanctions.
Next thing here: change voter registration, despite my nice elderly Dem precinct person who walks through th neighborhood and endorses socialists in local elections.
One must have some identification, as Britain is telling the Windrush people.
If one could glean anything at all from a glimpse, seeing his
fake, painted-on smile for a moment, captured at the farcical White House Correspondents Dinner by the CSPAN cameras, just about said it all about these stilted, jaded, conditioned, hermetically-sealed bourgeois assholes who "represent" us.
See if you can spot him:
Although, when I mentioned this to a comedian friend who I was talking to about Michelle Wolf's very good performance, I thought I saw as the one sole person not cowering or wearing his fake-polite mask, that to be Joseph Stiglitz, but who was probably Jeff Weaver. He was the only person seen to be clapping.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut
Cross-posted at our Patreon
page at... our Patreon page becuz it's Sat.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
cuz it's sat - left-handed compliment :-)
Ha! Was trying to
think of something
clever and drew a blank. Was early (for me) and the brain hadn't kicked in.
Still hasn't. One of those days. Anyway... great post! As usual.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
I don't disagree with most of your analysis
of the history and current situation. But, (you knew that was coming), Bernie is only one man. He tries his best.
It's not that he's wrong or corrupt or a fool.
The problem is one man cannot take down a century of BS, he needs help, not blame for failure.
Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!
Firesign Theater
Stop the War!
bing! My sediments eggxactly.
For me it's about
continuing the message, continuing the fight.
I can't worry about Bernie or how he "stabbed us all in the back."
He is The One that lit this candle, got this potty stotted (in my best Bernie accent), and will always be remembered for that if he doesn't accomplish another thing. It ain't up to Bernie to fix what is. That he left to us.
the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.
here's my version of that
The problem is the system which produces/selects the candidates/platform
. Trying to fix it by supporting ANY candida tell is doomed to fail. I guess my point is that your idea that Bernie can't fix it alone is a reason to stop fusing on Bernie qand start focusing on issues. And when you do that, Bernie is on the wrong side or AOL from too many issues for me.
Sorry
On phone. Curse autocomplete.
I never expected Bernie to be Jesus . . .
So I have not been disappointed. I don't know his life or read his mind. I never expected to agree with him on everything. I don't agree with anyone on everything.
I will continue to vote on the issues. There is about to be a runoff in our local democratic primary for the congressional seat left vacant by Joe Barton (asshole). Jana Lynne Sanchez vs. Ruby Mae Woldriff (name spelling?). Jana Lynne is pretty blame progressive, but not as much as I would like. However, Ruby Mae is a nothing candidate. She doesn't even talk about issues on her website that I could find. She is clearly the dem party favorite though. She would never ever be able to beat a republican challenger.
So I am thinking I need to do a bit of work for Jana Lynne. She is not as anti-war as I would like, claiming that our country's security is vital. When I wrote to her campaign about it, they replied that her big deal is really about taking care of veterans. Well, I'm for that too.
The greens don't have anyone running for that seat. In fact, in Texas, I am not sure they will be on the ballot this time. The dems have quite a few progressive types running, so that is probably pulling away from the greens.
I just appreciate anyone from anywhere who does anything progressive.
Marilyn
"Make dirt, not war." eyo
@EdMass No, he is not wrong or
No, he is not wrong or corrupt or a fool. He is compromised.
This has been adequately borne out by the leaked (by Wikileaks) emails between John Podesta and Robby Mook.
I don't mean to be a jerk, but neither do I understand why we keep having that particular part of this conversation. What's up with Sanders' moral character is fairly simple, though one could have a debate (I guess) about the stuff involving his making deals with the Dems in the 90s (which I think either Cass or Henry A Wallace laid out on this site).
But Bernie could be the most moral and wonderful guy on the planet and it wouldn't matter. Once someone is compromised, he--or she--is compromised, and the question of individual moral character becomes moot.
"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 think it's interesting how people can admire and quote people
from the past and yet learn absolutely nothing from it. Like Smedley Butler and "war is a racket". It should be that simple but somehow it becomes something that applied "back then", not now.
The same goes for quotes about the duopoly. We can find all sorts of them going back to the founding about the ineffectiveness and outright corruption of the duopoly, yet here we are, still trying to make the round peg fit in the square hole.
"The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles."
That quote is from Eugene Debs himself back in the early 1900's, a hero of Bernie Sanders. Yet Bernie still serves the democratic party anyway. So do his supporters even though many don't want to admit that. Even many who oppose the dem party assert that it was taken over by the Clinton's or started becoming a neoliberal and war party in the eighties or something like that, discounting the history that indicates this national representative duopoly system has always been the problem.
I think the duopoly has to be opposed, more than just not voting for them. There must be major changes to this political system. That will not come by working within the system, i.e., electing more and better democrats. It's possible a third party approach could work, however that would take too long. We are controlled by a criminal mafia and the longer we wait, the more people will get hurt.
The only answer is an independent working class/middle class movement to demand democracy and an end to oligarchy, imperialism and private global financialization. I ask people all the time if they think we should stick with this duopoly political system forever. Very few say yes because almost everyone knows how fucked up our political system is now, how it only serves the "one percent". Hell, even Jimmy Carter admitted as much. Then I ask, "if not now, when".
That's where we're stuck.
Agreed, BA
I posted a link to an article about inverted totalitarianism yesterday and this is what voting does when we keep voting in a corrupt system.
The longer the self-identified left and liberal class seek to work within a system that the political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls "Inverted totalitarianism', the more the noose will be tightened around our necks.
This is exactly what has been happening since the democrats abandoned the working class and especially since the Clintons arrived in DC. Look at how republican policies Bill got passed after the republicans weren't able to. The ph Obama continued where Bill left off. Almost every policy went to helping the upper class get their agendas passed. Now we're left with Trump finishing the job.
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
I did look at those articles SD, thanks.
Couldn't agree more either. Hedges called for a "revolt" in one of them, which is basically the same as revolution. If the goal is to rid ourselves of this inverted totalitarianism, or rule by the rich, oligarchy or whatever we want to call it, then that's the only choice, to revolt against the power. At the very least, the national election system should get the attention recommended by Howard Zinn, i.e., the time it takes to mark your ballot. Way too much time, effort and money is spent on these two political parties.
We in Flawer'Duh have nowhere to go. Nothing to fight for.
While the old rich assholes who rule this state continue to whine about us younger folks who can't even find jobs, the state, or what's left of it, continues to die. Oh sure, there's plenty of 'development' where I live, but it's all shit-wage strip malls and more penthouses for said old rich assholes and Silicon Valley technocrats the bourgeoisie will move in from out of state.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
There is no solution within the Democratic Party. The CIA was
its spawn and has now come back to reclaim it. The Kennedy-Johnson Administrations were the high point of overt CIA influence over official "liberal" Washington from the Washington Post to USAID and the Rand Institute, if it was brainy and Ivy League, its intellectual and ideological epicenter was in Langley. There is the yearning to recreate that half-fanciful Camelot again. Of course, the CIA needs its nemesis to justify itself. That means creating a Neo-KGB and a New McCarthyism. That's the dark side of Camelot, again.
John Kennedy . . .
vowed to splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces after the Bay of Pigs. He started by firing Alan Dulles and leading members of his clique. Dulles headed the CIA from Jan. 1951 to Nov. 1961.
If you want to understand the rise of the CIA look to the Bushes starting with Prescott.
@FuturePassed And look where it got
And look where it got him.
"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
2018 primaries be the ones to fully expell progressives
Tom Perez and gang have effectively purged progressives from the DNC. The DCCC is preventing progressives from running or attacking them when they do run. State parties are actively pulling shit and shenegians on progressive candidates. Media coverage on candidates is pretty much dictated by establishment party officials leaving news wholes about progressives.
Democrats have a long history of cheating other democrats and going back 40 some years, attacking the progressive wing of the party. This generation of newly minted progressives working within the party will be asked to be loyal, give, money and shut up to the very people who cheated them.
I beginning to believe that these primaries will signal an end of any hope for progessive insurgency once and for all. And yes, all that will be left is for Bernie to go around trying to cajole beaten down progressives to stand loyal and tall after what they experienced. In this sense he is a sheepdog as now he is proactively trying to get progressives into the role of party peasant.
Over a year into the regime, fear and appeals to a some Trumpan future apocolyse won't work as the world of Trump is no different than the time before Trump.
I would not be surprised that the promised blue wave does not materialize because progressives will have simply left the party in the general election.
Holy shit. He's Teddy Roosevelt.
AFAIAC, Bernie is half a leftist. He is left on economics and social policy; but he is rightwing on the MIC, foreign policy, and Israel.
Complete with the disgust for (domestic) corruption.
No wonder progressives like him LOL
"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