The Future of the Bernie Movement and the Political Revolution
Good article by Harold Meyerson on future possibilities created by the Sanders campaign for president. I wanted to share it here.
Her's a quick part. Don't know how to do quotes here. I'll learn.
"The Long March of Bernie’s Army
Where it came from; where it’s headed.snip
But Sanders’s is not a campaign that history will judge by the number of votes he won. Like only a handful of predecessor campaigns, like no presidential campaign since Barry Goldwater’s, his will be judged by whether it sparked a movement that transformed America. That’s the metric by which Sanders himself measures his success: Whether his campaign can build what he calls a revolution, inspiring his supporters (and some of Hillary Clinton’s, too), once this year’s campaign is done, to build the political power and social movements that can break the hold that wealth exerts on politics and policy, and thereby re-create the mass prosperity that was once America’s calling card to the world.
snip
Leaders of unions, community-organizing groups, minority organizations and student groups, prominent environmentalists and Sanders activists, precinct walkers and online campaigners—some longtime allies, some total strangers to one another—are “all in one large, shifting conversation,” in the words of one such leader, to figure out how to build the Revolution once the Sanders campaign is done.
Some are planning national conclaves, like the “People’s Summit” in Chicago in mid-June, where the disparate groups in the Sanders universe will gather to lay out a common agenda. Some are planning how to prod the delegates at the Democratic Convention (including some pledged to Clinton) to shift the party well to the left. More fundamentally, they are debating ideas on how to create something—organizations, coalitions, networks, local, state, national—that can capture and build on the energy and politics that the Sanders campaign has unleashed."
http://prospect.org/article/long-march-bernie%E2%80%99s-army
It's a very interesting post and worth reading in its entirety.
The battle for Bernie's nomination is far from over, but win or lose, we need to create the political revolution.
I'll be back later tonight to read people's comments and respond.
Comments
I don't think we do tip jars here.
First in my own post!!
look up - under your tags... eom
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
In a hurry and not always smart :-)
Thanks.
Uh huh
Sounds like the TomP I knew at GOS.
Hi Tom. What gives? Had enough of the Pay-to-play monarchy masquerading as a progressive site?
Haven't been banned there yet. I like this place.
Completely disagree with the Blogowner's repression of speech.
Still go both places.
Haven't seen you for a while. Good to see you.
Welcom TomP
I respected your work at GOS very much, and hope to see your work around these parts too!
Stick around TomP
TomP, I hope to see more of your posts here at caucus99percent.com. Since the evening of 3/14 I have avoided DKos as if it was a source of the (corporatist) plague. I believe this site can blossom into a real asset for the Progressive Movement now and in the future. Any traffic or quality diary submissions to DK only perpetuate Markos' capacity to co-opt Progressive energy and manipulate it in support of his DLC/HRC masters.
I ain't yet either, but not for lack of the clintonites efforts.
I got gang flagged to the tune of 19 times in one post for calling out one of their regular trolls.
They then started to chortle about the number of flags which made me laugh.
As if getting Banned from a site full of fucking conservatives pretending to be progressives would upset me, lol!
Pretty much now I am just there to keep calling them on their bullshit, but no new diaries or anything, I am not supporting that site with my content until/unless something dramatically changes.
All I do know is I would like to keep my account through November if for no other reason so I can tell them, "See, I told you so." if Bernie wins the nom, or barring that, when Hillary loses the General to Trump or whatever clown they nominate, because I am FIRMLY convinced that the only way the Democrats lose the white house is if they Nominate Hillary. (And for the Record, I said that WAY before Bernie, or Clinton, announced their candidacies.)
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Don't think there are tj's
but thanks for posting here, one less reason to check out TOP. Tho I still do for LD's BNR. He has put so much hard work into that, want to see it still be successful.
BTW = for other newer members, just scanned the Members List - and LaFeminista is now here too!!! Yeah, I love to read her writing.
Sounds like it's all about the Democratic party
"If the Sanders revolution is going to roll on, it must begin with a kindred redefinition of the Democratic Party"
And considering 80% of Democrats approve of Obama's job performance, that makes me wonder what kind of a "revolution" this is going to be.
One that is separate from the democrats.
They had their chance. Time to move on.
I come from a long line of democrats. I felt sad for a little while. Not any more.
'Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years, Doctor, and I’m happy to state I finally won out over it." Elwood P. Dowd "
That's exactly what that article is about.
They can count me out. And my young children and friends, they know better. This was a problem with OWS in that the Democratic party tried to exert influence and make it about electoral politics, make it about them.
Occupy the primaries
OWS did just fine without the 'help' of the Democratic Party. Now there is a group of committed progressive activists that will vote. It changes the definition of independent voter quite a bit. So far, it is not enlarging the Democratic Party as I see it. There is a large fraction of dems that would welcome them as they are. I would suggest that they are largely Bernie voters, but they are not the party leaders. This primary battle is about more than two candidates IMHO.
There are pluses and minuses.
Transforming the Democratic Party gives us a familiar -- and yes, powerful -- apparatus, ready made but for its restaffing.
Foregoing the party to make another puts the revolution at a deficit of political power but a greater freedom to make what we do create match our intentions, without nearly as much interference from dinoDems desperately clinging to a power they hold now.
And that dilemma of which way do we go will be the biggest hurdle we face as a movement.
Interestingly, we're getting a foretaste of it in the decision that c99ers are making about whether to keep visiting TOP or cut all ties.
There is nothing wrong
With challenging the Democratic Party from without, and in fact some have predicted just this development for years. Changing it from within sounds good on paper, but they are extremely entrenched and we just don't have the time to fool around with them any more.
As far as I'm concerned the last POTUS I had much respect for was Carter, and he ran into a certain amount of trouble by refusing to play by the rules of corruption. I knew people who adored Clinton when he was running, I knew people who adored Obama. Doing same thing over and over again and expecting different results equals what? What is the point of trying to work within the system when all it ever lets you have are a few small social gains here and there?
Granted, these small social gains are big for some people, so I agree that it's not really appropriate to try to discourage people from trying to work within the system. I don't think it's really appropriate to discourage people from any constructive approach. But at the same time, I'm not going to pretend I think the prospect of incrementalism is workable anymore. It might have been fifty years ago.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
I'm with you, Miep, I love Pres. Carter dearly and he's the last
president I do love like that. Clinton fooled me at first and so did Obama. Carter was so prescient and clear-eyed. And to this day, I say to anyone who will listen, that no American soldiers died in senseless wars on his watch. Think of that achievement when considering all his predecessors and all his successors. A true president of peace and a real Nobel Prize winner, unlike Henry effing K or Obama. I will mourn him very much when he passes. A true American Great. Best wishes,
Resilience: practical action to improve things we can control.
3D+: developing language for postmodern spirituality.
Carter was a safe choice for the elites
I love President Carter too. He's by far the best ex-President EVER.
With their hearts they turned to each others heart for refuge
In troubled years that came before the deluge
*Jackson Browne, 1974, Before the Deluge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SX-HFcSIoU
The elites hated Carter as I recall. He was a southerner, had
advanced technical degrees, was not from CA or the Northeast, and was generally not like the movers and shakers. In addition the WWII generation was at its peak and they wanted 'manly' and aggressive action.
The elites wanted Ted Kennedy, but he had his own sexual and other problems. As I recall it was much like today in that the predecessor to the DNC which had been run for 30 years by the same elite group was challenged first by McGovern and then by Carter over its ineptitude. The elites' response was to pout and surreptitiously mount one challenge after another to Carter and in many cases to support Reagan.
If only our elites were as bright as they like to pretend they are.
I remember reading
in I think Cadillac Desert, it must have been, about how Carter didn't just rubber-stamp dam proposals, and that this refusal to go along with the pork program helped make him very unpopular in certain quarters.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
Not Democratic Party elites
Think higher elites. Given the disgrace of Nixon it was highly unlikely a republican would win that election (imho). I think a navy man, so intimately involved in creating our nuclear navy could be considered a good care-taker of the IMC. I don't believe Carter was complicit but I do believe the elites viewed him as a path to regaining the Whitehouse. The money elites.
With their hearts they turned to each others heart for refuge
In troubled years that came before the deluge
*Jackson Browne, 1974, Before the Deluge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SX-HFcSIoU
Flint Water Crisis - Citizen Activism
I'm linking an article which speaks to the reality of the growing disenfranchisement of citizens. What struck me is the remarkable ability of the Democratic Party to use the suffering of the people of Flint as an opportunity to cynically sell the Party as a vigorous opponent of this kind of exploitation. I watched Democracy Now's videos on the Flint water crisis. One of the founders of Flint Democracy Defense League Water Task Force, said the only "constituents" who have been protected throughout the budget crisis in Michigan are bond holders. Bond holders will never take a haircut. Think Greece ... Think Puerto Rico ... Think Argentina ...
http://usuncut.com/politics/flint-democratic-debate/
Neither political party is prepared to protect the citizens. This is becoming increasingly clear to more and more people. So, the critical next step is for citizen activist groups and existing service organizations to come together and confront the real likelihood that they will need to take matters into their own hands. As real harms occur more and more, neither party will be able to gain the continued support of the people. Coercion will be required to maintain stability.
It is the same issue we faced in the Greens in 2000.
Bernie has gotten much farther and influenced so many more than Nader. Unfortunately, neither way works and we may be back to a Clinton after 16 years.
I think the discussion is important and it never can happen on Daily Kos.
People can choose either way and still ally on issues. We don't have to hate those who choose the Dem Party path or Green Party path (or another party). We can work together with respect on issues where we agree, which will be many.
Been there, done that
and I still have the T-shirt. I was a Florida I-4 corridor Naderite.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Yes, I learnd a lot but moved back to
the Dem Party.
Still, the issue remains.
We thought that a third party would either pull Dems left to coopt us, or the progressive Dems would eventually split off.
Nader was supposed to get us 5% of the vote and ballot access many places. He and we failed.
I've been a Dem again since mid-2001.
After Hillary isn't it Chelsea's turn?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chelsea?
What and give up her $900,000 a year job as the head of the Clinton Foundation? No way she would take that salary cut. I think her hedge fund manager husband would recommend she remain in her lucrative position. She's also on the board of several news publications.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Such a beautiful country
Lets buy it for the children!
"If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back" - Regina Brett
Could the problem be that the selection process itself
sucks? By that I mean we are still in the cycle that we have been in since JFK's, MLK's, and RFK's murders. The cycle has meant, that with few exceptions that we have been ruled by a set of people who present the most centrist candidates possible and then require us to fight like hell to get another candidate through the cycle. We are then surprised that we lose more often than not.
The fact that we lose more often than not, cannot be argued and the theory that we lose because we do not provide compelling choices is at least viable. The Nader option would not even have been an issue if the dem party had a more compelling candidate than Gore, but he pretty much cruised to the nomination. It is not just money, connections and the like. It is also the fact that very few influential people outside of politics control the party. In particular these have been the financial houses, some biotech firms, and a few hi-tech companies.
These are of course only my opinions, except the fact that we lose 2/3 of the time with the DNC backed candidates and processes.
Go back and forth myself
but in 2000 it might not have just been the Greens. Half a milion registered dems plus millions of independents voted for Bush due largely to disgust with WJC. Disgust with both behavior and policies.
It was stolen.
A fact that everyone now seems to sweep under the carpet.
As someone who watched it happen, I really dislike the "Nader gave us Bush" narrative.
"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 thought Meyerson's article one of the best I've read this year
Ever since Bernie Sanders announced, I've thought that the end result of his campaign would not be a Democratic nominee, but a new Left political movement in this country. The Left has been fractured into a million pieces, victims of the social wedge issue tactics and the other divide and conquer practices of the oligarchy. We've long needed an integrated core set of values that most Americans can relate to and identify themselves with. We haven't really had that since the New Deal. LBJ's liberalism was about serving particular groups who had been left out, and lost that communal spirit of "we're all in this together."
Political change has to have both an inside and an outside game. I've had this discussion with Meteor Blades over there, and we both agreed that in our day the outside game is more important. It is vital to build structures and organization outside the party framework, because trying to do so inside it will inevitably lead to co-opting. The outside movement has to develop sufficient strength to oust the establishment figures in a party before challenging it inside the party. But that doesn't mean the movement can't champion individual candidates, or even slates of candidates, in a party. These candidates should come from the movement, though. The movement can't fall victim to empty rhetoric and false promises of business-as-usual politicians from the establishment.
Meyerson correctly identifies the vital task as transitioning the Sanders campaign from Bernie to building what's next. That's where we're most likely to fail. We won't be hierarchical, but we can't build anything out of chaos and anarchy. Hopefully Bernie Sanders has a next chapter in mind to help guide his campaign into a more lasting movement. I think he's got a pretty good idea how to do this, and using his leadership to help guide us at the beginning would be very helpful. I don't see him selling out for 30 pieces of platform silver and urging all of us to Unite Behind Hillary. Ain't gonna happen in any case, and Bernie's clearly smart enough to understand that.
Please help support caucus99percent!
Exactly!
Hadn't read your post before I posted. Very well said.
It's true right now like it was back then. The old devils are at it again. When I say devil you know who I mean these animals in the dark malicious politicians with nefarious schemes charlatans and crooked cops. - 'Old Devils' William Elliot Whitmore
Good perspective
I agree, we need an inside game and an outside game simultaneously. I still believe it's best to try to re-make the Democratic Party. But, until it's re-made we need an organization that meets our values where we can hang our hats. Hopefully, we can find a way to make both goals work in concert.
Also, if we have an inside game and outside game, they can't load up in the post. We can use our shooting to stretch out the defense and get easy looks underneath. It all makes perfect sense.
GradySeasons
"The nightlife ain't no good life, but it's my life."
These are my general thoughts on sustaining a movement
What is needed can be listed, condensed and organized into basic principles. I wish there was a way to keep track of our discussions and progress toward a sustainable movement.
1. Universal Ideals
Central ideals that will attract Progressives, Democrats, Independents and Republicans (democracy)
2. People Activism
The universal ideals would be translated regularly into a more specific platform that would motivate people to become activists. ($15 minimum wage)
3. People Money
Raise money through many small donations to fund projects and candidates so the politicians are beholden to the people.
4. Decentralized Organization
Leaders will always fail us. Groups always get co-opted by an inner core of elites.
5. An American Movement
America is unique. A movement needs to reflect our values. Being "American" helps to bring in more conservative populists.
6. A Progressive Movement
We can define what “progressive” means to us in this movement, particularly in its ideals and platform.
7. American Progressive Association or American Progressive Coalition
Progressives are independent activists who go out and start many kinds of groups. A loose affiliation of individuals and groups many be possible.
I would like a manifesto
That any party can plagiarize. Who cares who gets it done, what matters is what gets done. Or more importantly, that it does get done. A simple manifesto of items that are hugely popular with Americans could be a very powerful tool. Let the party's fracture or not, let personalities shine or stink, what we need is a document that is based on real issues that we all know need to happen stat.
1. Accept climate change as the biggest threat we have ever faced and will reshape the global community and foreign policy for all nations.
2. Renewable energy deserves subsidies, not fossil fuel companies.
3. US infrastructure needs renovation.
4. Financial industry cannot gamble with public money.
5. US military and intelligence needs to shoot less and facilitate more. Talking is all it takes. Which involves listening. We will always have stuff to talk about. ISIS only exists because of weak governments unable to get support of the people. The US govt is also weak in this way. This is the security threat to the world that needs fixing.
6. Corporations interactions with government must be open to the public. They want something, they ask publicly. They don't call privately and trade cash for access. The lobbyist industry needs regulation. Corporate power is the single most destabilizing influence in the world.
OK, that is enough to convey the idea. The points should be obvious and simple and well explained so the people will want it. That is where the real power comes from - the people wanting it. First it needs to exist, then it needs a party to see it implemented. It should avoid being liberal or conservative - it should be honest and practical. Bernie is great at this stuff, but we do need a revolution. It could be Bernie's post election manifesto.
"If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back" - Regina Brett
In response
1. Climate change is a symptom, not a cause. But yes, events we created are now officially overtaking us. It's the biggest game-changer.
2. I'm not going to argue this point, but will add that using less energy is a key focus. If the goal is to keep on accelerating energy production at the current rate (or anywhere near it) it's doomed to fail, as it is hugely more energy-intensive to make and maintain solar and wind structures than it is to suck up some oil and burn it. There are ways to approach this. California has been doing some interesting work in this department.
3. This is a real problem, as one cannot just pick up the cities and move them while you redo the sewer systems. In some ways, one of the knottiest ones.
4. This would be relatively simple to fix, were there but will.
5. Nobody makes money from facilitation. So maybe we should just stop assuming these countries are children who need assistance from Big Daddy USA and leave them alone. An ethical solution would be to give them back everything anybody has stolen from them, but this is logistically problematic.
6. Put it all on the Internet. Look at all the crap there is on the Internet. It's not like they're running out of room.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
I wasn't trying to complete the manifesto -
just start the conversation. That was my 3 am I am awake anyway shot from the hip. People make sense of the world in their own ways and what I want is an action plan that is a rational and reasonable response to the reality of the world at this time. Some folks think god created everything 6000 years ago. Good for them. That is of no consequence to me. The fact is the wealthy have all the money, the climate is changing, bridges are crumbling, voter turnout is in the toilet. What should we do about it?
We're just people making choices. Instead of struggling over which people get to be the deciders and let em rip, or arguing over clowns versus suits having the right approach, why not go directly to the choices themselves and say these are the issues that concern us, this is what we want to do about them. Who will support us take these steps to resolve them?
"If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back" - Regina Brett
Oh gosh, no need to feel defensive
I agree! It's a discussion that has to be had. We've got to stop thinking that if the right people win office they will fix everything. It's way too passive.
When people ask these sorts of questions, my response tends to be to jump right in and start talking about them. I don't mean to be overwhelming or confrontational, though I may come off that way at times. I'm just kinda direct.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
Individual rights vs. the collective
A Manifesto could begin with a new list of individual rights.
There is a fundamental contrast between Republican individualism and Socialist collectivism. If this conflict were resolved you could build a movement that had broad appeal. Slogans such as “Power to the People” sound collective.
A new Manifesto of individual rights could help establish the value of each individual to avoid swinging too far toward a collective society.
Rights have not proven very durable as an issue.
Both individuals and collectives have rights. I think every conversation on every issue is redolent with them, and while it will never be a bad time to review them, they end up being fighting talk fast if they become the issue. They arise because the conversation has broken down - one side is feeling unheard. But just assigning them doesn't usually resolve much.
Example voting rights. Folks in Arizona got stiffed on polling booth access. While we have a concept of voting rights just because you have them doesn't mean you get to vote if you can't wait 4 hours in line. While I agree with the concept of voting rights, and am pissed off at some states abuse, I might add an item that says election days should be paid federal/state holidays. Or voting is mandatory. Or both. It avoids the fighting talk, addresses the issue directly to some extent (voting rights is a big subject) but what I really want is everyone voting. Somewhere in there I would tackle the issues of voter ID and installing a process that voters can track the processing of their votes.
The point is NOT to make a fight. It is to get shit done. Fighting is a sign of failure to communicate - either to speak up or to listen. I am not looking to split the middle here, I want issues that are directly and simply actionable right now. People will understand the simple do/not do aspect and will support it accordingly.
"If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back" - Regina Brett
No, but being a lifelong Democrat
told after you've waited for 5 hours that you're registered as an indie, something stinks to high heaven.
"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 seems mostly about boundaries to me
Lines, where we draw them, who gets to draw them and where. Humans are very invested in boundaries. So you really can't get anywhere without acknowledging that, but I agree that it turns into a can't see the forest for the trees thing quite readily.
I'm all for the National Voting Day holiday, and all paper ballots, and everybody gets a paid holiday. Why does something this important have to be done so efficiently? I'd rather it was ritualized. But no lines, nobody likes lines. More like a lot of comfy chairs and live entertainment in the antechamber, if the process gets backed up. Free coffee. Lots of redundancy.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
and banjos.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Even better!
Bring your own instruments!
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
nice bball analogy
We need 3 point shooters. Of basic plans forward.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Very good points.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
Excellent comment DallasDoc.
I think Bernie may endorse Hillary if he does not prevail, but he won't sell out. I agree he and others will help grow the movement. I really liked Tulsi Gabbard, Ben Jealous, and the CWA person who spoke in St. Louis with Bernie.
One of the best things that came out of Bernie's run was to expose the bankruptcy of some "progressives." I've grown to hate that word. It has so little content.
And Bernie reached young people.
He gave me hope.
They spoke in St. Louis with Bernie.
Gabbard is very anti war and had a withering critique of Clinton's hawkish policies.
Agree with you, TomP
We've seen a large faction within the Democratic party which appears little different from the Republican party, in terms of its winner-take-all partisanship, its deafness to any contrary opinion, and its willingness to burn down a democratic system if that is what's required to win. Principles get thrown out the window when they conflict with membership in the party. It's not only the Red and Blue parties that are very much the same under the surface; it's also true of their most devoted followers.
These people will be very difficult to persuade. Like the corporatist Democratic insiders they follow, they need to be defeated.
Please help support caucus99percent!
what a great discussion to
what a great discussion to wake up to here on a chilly Friday morning. (Good Friday holiday so I keep thinking its Saturday!)
It is so much more freer here.
You all created a good place.
It is freer.
I have not been banned for commenting that I will never vote for that woman.
I do believe that c99% and K4S, are good places. They have good people, and as we grow the good will grow.
I'd like to see
The movement continue by funding various Congressional races, especially DWS' challenger for instance. An organized left-wing group with stacks of cash can make a huge difference, and may help wean Congress off the corporate tit.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
This is the ticket
Dallasdoc, I think you've got the best perspective on the situation. The question right now is not whether the future is inside or outside the Dem party. The question is to form a strong coalition around the question of what the future should look like. And for that, old hippies like me and several other folks around here can provide support, but we do not own the future. It is critical though that the younger generation stay involved and keep proving that they have power that forces the establishment to take notice. If they don't come out and vote in every single election, they will be pushed aside and ignored. My advice to Millenials - you are an even bigger cohort than us Boomers. You have the numbers - use them.
As for the party question, I think we all need to wait and see what shakes out after this election. With Crump tearing the GOP apart, and Bernie on the Dem side, it is quite possible that there could be a major realignment of both parties coming up. The corporate oligarchs have had a good run splitting themselves between both parties and playing the Left and Right off against each other while claiming to be the "moderate center". But if they get shut out, they just might decide to change tactics and unify on one side or the other. If they decide to jump right (which would be the more natural direction for them), it could leave the Dem party structure open for us.
The simple fact is that the US electoral system, with first-past-the-post winners not requiring an absolute majority, makes it impossible for a third party to be anything other than a spoiler. Which will always work to benefit the party that is further away from them. Everyone loves to point to the GOP as proof of it being possible, but in reality they only came into being after the Whigs had for all intents already ceased to exist as a functioning party.
I agree 100%, DallasDoc!
And I think he wrote it
back in October of 2015? Right before they fired him...
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
Whether its from inside or outside or both,
ultimately its about the issues. We want everyone to move left. Don't we even want to push the republicans to the left as well? We should be fighting on all fronts but ultimately it will be about making sure the narratives/conversations being had are about the issues we want. With the solutions we want being discussed. This is true whether it is an presidential election year or not.
It's true right now like it was back then. The old devils are at it again. When I say devil you know who I mean these animals in the dark malicious politicians with nefarious schemes charlatans and crooked cops. - 'Old Devils' William Elliot Whitmore
Often you can't really tell people things
They have to experience them. You can give them experiences, though, or show them things.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
Sometimes you can share
a framework that helps them make sense of what has been happening. You can share your own experiences and understanding.
Absolutely
You can show them frames that make sense of what confuses them. Them be politics. But it's their experiences that are ultimately going to drive which frames they accept as reality.
However, it's huge to go from thinking one's self an outlier to realizing you are part of a larger phenomenon that just isn't getting a lot of press, and this is one of the more valuable things about the Internet, how it makes these understandings possible. In this sense, sharing personal experiences can be a real game-changer.
Stay on track. Stay in lane. Don't throw rocks.
We'll know that we've won
... when the conservative party moves left. It will probably take a decade or two, and I'm not even sure which party will be the conservative one by then. Republicans have so marginalized themselves that they're going to have to take a turn somewhere to avoid extinction. It wouldn't surprise me to see them start to adopt parts of Bernie's economic populist message. Trump is clearly taking on trade pacts and the corruption of politics, and I think these issues are a large part of his popularity over there. Not everybody who supports him does so out of racism.
One of our parties has to start adopting an economic populist platform at some point. When the other one is dragged along, we've won for this generation.
Please help support caucus99percent!
We'll know that we're making progress
My cliche' speech; It's not a destination, it's a journey, it's about which direction you are moving. Always leftward, damn the torpedoes. once more into the breach my friends.
That decision may be informed as much by resentment at
Boss kos and his edict as by disgust with the ghost of the Democratic Party. I have slight sentimental attachment to the idea of that party. It used to matter to me. But I've been in the same place for decades, hugging my "party of FDR" principles, while the Democratic Party's been chugging farther away from me in whatever compass direction "to the right" is (ENE?). What remains is a tiny outline on the horizon, grown small and small-minded and small-spirited, a lip-service-only alternative to the Rs. No real fight for the New Deal principles or even the Great Society. All talk and show. How hollow it's become. I'd still hang around TOP it I weren't so resentful of Markos and his blatant censorship. I'd rather give him a flick of the finger than a click he can show for revenue purposes.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." --Jiddu Krishnamurti
The nice thing about this place is that question
can honestly be discussed here.
I share this concern
Even worse, while I'd like to believe this is low information voters... those caught in the grip of the media's propaganda matrix, I know that isn't true. A simple look at GOS shows that at least 35% of it's participants absolutely know all the facts and knowingly choose corruption, greed, war, and corporatism. On the brighter side, that tells us that among well informed citizens, somewhere below 65% do not choose those things.
I'm still out to sea on whether it's best to reform from within or go 3rd party. I seriously need one of the political geeks here to explain to me the mechanical hurdles of a 3rd party in the US.
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
Hey TomP
Nice to see you. I missed you.
Good to see you, too.
Hi Tom
Or you can do html
No obituaries for me. In fact, I'm reading stuff that a third party run could be in the future. See this diary.
http://caucus99percent.com/content/bernie-news-dump-cuba-better-cut-it-out
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Thanks.
GOOD NEWS!!!!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-union-endorsement_us_...
Maybe Trumpka will wake up now too!
Unions allowing the Clintons
to coerce them into early endorsements really made me angry. They got so screwed by Obama on the EFCA - twice, and they're still doing what the Dems tell them.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
One of my in-laws is in the upper management of a major Union
and he works largely inside the beltway now. He is in the boat with HRC all the way. We've had some pretty loud exchanges about Bernie to say the least. He is one of the Serious People who doesn't believe in free things and unicorns.
Bottom line is that he is more interested in the job and the perks and keeping all his inside the beltway buddies happy than the rank and file - over the years the further away he has moved from being one of them the more condescending he has become towards them. And he wonders why Trump's populism has gained traction in his Union ... while at the same time actively displaying his contempt for Bernie's 'leftist' progressive stances to the workers. Sad to see him lose touch with the Union movement's core historic 'leftist' philosophies.
FEEL THE BERN: "But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing." - Thomas Paine
"Here I Stand, I can do no other." - Attributed to Martin Luther, 1521
Amen!
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqMhU64HMUA]
"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
Post election
Channeling pragmatism here, even if the word has begun sullied by God's Gift to Wall Street...assuming that we do not get to say "President Sanders" next January, what will Bernie do? If he, as I hope he does, very loudly sheds his Democratic cloak, he would have the opportunity to pull his supporters in a new direction. Doesn't matter if it's "progressive," "socialist democratic," or something wholly new. He has earned millions of passionate and loyal supporters, and we will not stop working to bring his policies to fruition...as long as his primary loss leads directly into a new, more visible party.
I don't want him to lose, but it seems more likely than not. But what will crush me is if he goes back to bring the amendment king, with no higher goal.
It's about what we do. He is advancing the struggle.
Up to us.
What also struck me about this was
what a small universe we were in at Daily Kos. We did not know about the June get together etc. I need to go to Reddit more.
I try to keep in touch with the group at Reddit too.
I find Reddit hard to use. As much as I try, I don't seem to be able to connect. I would like to keep our groups in touch with one another. We don't need more groups.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I like this format more, but I'll make
a pint to go by Mahakali Overdrive's group there this weekend.
Hey - what about us here! Where is our pint!
FEEL THE BERN: "But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing." - Thomas Paine
"Here I Stand, I can do no other." - Attributed to Martin Luther, 1521
Very good! Now I can't
Edit the comment and fix it.
The Bernie Movement
No matter what... the issue of corporate ownership of our country is being discussed. I'm with Bernie through the election and beyond. Cause it will get harder as we become more successful. This is going to be a long struggle. It won't be over after the election. It'll be the real start.
We've been gaining delegates all week...now less than 300 behind. Onward. Last day to register in NY tomorrow! They are looking for callers.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Yes, he moved the Overton Window
and brought real issues to the fore.
I'm conflicted
over this issue. I reckon I'm cynical as hell as well. BTW, glad to see you here!
I'm wondering (out loud) maybe we take a two prong approach. (we, being progressives that are way left of Hillary). Those of us upset, disillusioned, disgusted, that absolutely hate, well fricking can't stand the Democratic party, then work with other progressives and hopefully pull together the other various small progressive groups into a collation into a new or existing 3rd party, and those that can handle working within the system, work towards the same ends.
I certainly don't want to limit any discussion at all. But to me, there seems to be no reason, that I can think of, why both inside and outside groups can not work together to effect the desired changed this country needs so badly.
The Chicago Summit sounds like a cool idea. From there seek out and work with people that are running for office, as this list from Expats for Bernie, posted on the DemocraticUnderground.Com, is complied of 191 people running / supporting Sander's platform.
Again, I'm thinking out loud, maybe the people from the Chicago summit can team up with the list of people running above and work towards the same platform goals, together, both from inside and outside, a real coordinated effort. Is that too touchy feely?
There's also this from Thom Hartmann, for taking over the party strategy (Do it like the Tea Party did.)
C99, my refuge from an insane world. #ForceTheVote
This x 1000
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
I agree. We can have big issue
coalitions while people explore different avenues electorally.
I learned in the Green in 2000 and 2001 the concept of electoral activism and issue activism. We need both.
Just because someone takes one path on electoral activism does not mean that we can't ally together in direct action, boycotts, protests, organizing, etc., on an issue.
Thought-provoking piece - ty for mentioning it
And nice to see you here.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." --Jiddu Krishnamurti
Thanks 2andfro.
What's the name of our movement?
Tea party was such a lame name. Remember when they called themselves tea baggers?
I like the idea of being called the "Humanist Party".
The tea party strategy of punishing the established republican candidate's by not voting or running their own candidates against them worked pretty darn good. I think we go with that plan.
Mamazing2
I've been thinking about just that thing...
Here's what I came up with, but it doesn't quite roll off the tongue.
Greens
Liberals/Lefties/Labor
Independents
Progressives
Democratic
Socialists
...Party of America
Or GLIPDS Party of America, for short.
We need more vowels. :/
"Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change." Stephen Hawking
NEW: http://www.twitter.com/trueblueinwdc
Pages