Inside Insiders, Inside Outsiders and Outside Outsiders

Which one are you - an Inside Insider, an Inside Outsider or an Outside Outsider? This questioned was inspired by reading a transcript of a Democracy Now conversation between Amy Goodman and Cornel West which prompted a flashback to my college sociology class and the concept of coalition triads.

Here’s the snippet of discussion which started this whole train of thought:

Cornel West: Unlike Bernie Sanders, I'm Not Convinced The Democratic Party Can Be Reformed

As a preface, Cornel West expressed frustration with the fact that the Democratic Party had proven itself incapable of coming out against TPP or fracking in its platform due to not wanting to embarrass the President and its ties to lobbyists. He said that this demonstrated a lack of “integrity and moral consistency”. He also said that by choosing to work within the Party, Bernie Sanders had become a New Deal Liberal as opposed to a Social Democrat. Here is his response when asked by Goodman for clarification about these terms:

That means that he is a—well, a Democratic socialist is a radical who’s critical of the system. A New Deal liberal works within the system and doesn’t want to bring massive critique for structural change. And I can understand it, because he’s inside. But those of us who are outside and free, we’re going to tell the truth. We’re going to be honest. We’re going to have a certain kind of moral and spiritual and intellectual integrity. And no matter how marginal that makes us, we’re not in any way going to become well adjusted to this injustice out here.

Based on CW’s comments about Bernie and the Democratic Party, to me he defined the 3 players of a power triad:

The DNC neolib centrist Democrats represent A, or the Inside Insiders. The Bernie Sanders contingent represents B, or the Inside Outsider. Lefty Independent types, like Cornel West, represent C or the Outside Outsider. Let’s just accept that no member of the triad can win a general election without the other. There is one other potential player outside of the triad and that would be D who represents Moderate Republicans

Coalition triads are a concept about how power can be shared by 3 entities with various configurations of individual strength within the triad. For example, if A>B>C, A will usually be part of the dominant power structure because they start off with greater strength and are very likely to get either B or C or both to join them since everyone likes to be with a winner. So either A +B or A+C works well as a coalition that will most likely work to support the goals of A with some sops to the subservient partner, whether it be B or C. Things get more interesting however if the minor members of the triad realize at some point that a union among them, B+C, has greater power conjoined than does A independently.

I think we just saw what happens when A+B formed an alliance, as that’s exactly what happened in the last election. Sadly it wasn’t enough to swing the election overall because nationally some Bs and a larger number Cs opted to stay home or defected to a third Party. Ds did not join A despite the pipe dreams of Charles Schumer and other great Democratic strategerists. So, A +B was a failed venture.

I think we can safely assume that A+C is a no go from the getgo. That leaves one last possible combination which would be B+C. In that combination A, the formerly superior member of the triad, is given the choice traditionally given to B and C accompanied by a sneer – Good luck with Trump! (Or McCain or Romney).

In truth, given that A has control over the power structure within the Party and the money and shows no sign of being willing to give up the scepter, re-electing Pelosi as a prime example, even a union of B+C has a small chance of ousting A from its dominant position, which supports Cornel West’s assertion that it is not possible to reform the Party from within, at least not in the near term.

Which means that given its propensity for stasis and incrementalism, the Democratic Party will continue to foist the losing coalition of A+B, neolibs and New Deal Democrats, in a forced marriage wherein all are unhappy and will continue to lose election after election. Meanwhile the C’s will continue to roam in the wilderness trying to entice the B’s to join with them while the Republicans mount various versions of Trumpzilla the Hun and continue to reshape the country to the Dickensian London of their daydreams, replete with workhouses and orphan asylums.

Aside from finding some Superman who can spin the Earth backwards on its axis through time back to a place where the Dem Leadership realizes HRC is fatally flawed and allows Bernie to win the primary, I don’t see anything on the horizon to alter the downward power spiral of the Democrats. Unless . . . .

One tiny bit of me wonders whether the ongoing wearing of purple by Bill, Hillary and Schumer, doesn’t signal FINALLY a future unveiling of a No Labels-ish Purple Party. Yes folks, Bernie’s too rad and Trump's too anti-social, so Bill and Hill will head the new Moderate Purple Party of both Dems and Repubs (blue + red = purple, get it?). Am I crazy for thinking this is on the horizon? Did ergot infest my ham on rye?

If that did happen, B+C could finally inherit the old manse, the Democratic Party and set about making all the repairs to the foundation, and put on some new paint and appeal to that 58% of the public who already polls as wanting single payer healthcare. Turns out radical is mainstream, who knew? (B+C)-A could be the winning combination.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

mimi's picture

up
0 users have voted.
Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

I think time has been somehow warped - notice how your comment precedes my publish time? I thought I was in draft mode, but for some reason, I always manage to screw that up.

I have to agree that the title is a bit Rumsfeldian.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

mimi's picture

and I was so "mean" to post into that draft mode. It shows up publicly then.
It's one of those thingies JtC's set-up let's you do.

I apologize. No offense meant, just a little teasing. I was so tired when I did that and my good behavior slipped.

I will read the whole thing now, because yesterday I couldn't do it anymore.

up
0 users have voted.
Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

and not visible to others and that the pink background was only visible to me letting me know I was still in draft mode. There's really no point for a draft mode if it means one is editing and revising publicly. Not an issue, just glad I know.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

Really clears things up in a lot of ways.

up
0 users have voted.

Category E?

This may change to "off with their damn heads/up against the wall" soon enough. Catagory F'em?

up
0 users have voted.
Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

I always called E the George Carlin contingent - "It's a big club and you're not in it" and participation is pointless except to maintain the charade. Alternately it could be called the Emma Goldman contingent - "If voting made a difference , it would be illegal."

I can sympathize with both perspectives now for the first time. I previously maintained that not voting as opposed to a protest or write-in vote was a waste of time since it wouldn't be registered clearly as the protest it is. I think I was wrong in that the missing voters have been acknowledged in this go-round as well as the Presidential undervote by people who did vote downballot but left the top slot blank.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

k9disc's picture

There's another variable that you didn't account for. It's a variable that nobody seems to account for but Frank Luntz and the Republican paymasters.

The variable is a residual, net change in electorate via the repetition and trafficking in particular frames. Maybe it's movement, probably has a velocity as well.

We've had 30 years of monetary or transactional framing: co-pays, economic health, ROI, who pays, lower taxes, the list of transactional frames and language that describes our political and social system, literally, goes on and on.

This massive shift of understanding is a result of A+B leadership. With it being like 90% A. As the ratio changes, the political landscape shifts. Bernie brought in a bunch of Cs and increased, greatly, the percentage of Bs within that A+B coalition.

The result was a massive lurch, that added to Drumpf's Left Wing economics, probably did cause Hillary's demise. That lurch also had great velocity. Things morphed quickly.

So there's also movement and velocity that needs to be embedded into the equation, PL. I'm finding this a very interesting idea all of a sudden.

BTW, the Rumsfeldian sounding deal with known unknowns and unknown unknowns, I believe comes from Six Sigma thinking. It sounds ridiculous, but it is rather important to be aware of, and valuable in addressing complex problems.

up
0 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

k9disc's picture

up
0 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

k9disc's picture

up
0 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

Your points are well-taken. I'm trying to counter all the "balanced budget" and "if government was your household budget" stuff. People need to know more about fiat currencies and even the trillion dollar coin idea. I think the years of war and the bank bailout proved that the fear of inflation has been over-hyped.

Also, Dems being the enablers of making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Like I keep saying, the only dollars the government can't find are the ones that flow directly as citizen benefits.

TPTB are desperate to find some way to censor us and to keep us from enlightening each other and fighting their entrenched memes.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

k9disc's picture

Like, massively A -- that 90% I was talking about.

B has been greatly emboldened. I think you'll find less of that bald faced lying with offensive euphemism you're fighting against in the near future. The movement, after the election in that direction should have already happened, I think that Tulsi Gabbard DUH! legislation is a good bellwether.

I don't think it happened because the As wanted to have an identity based hissy fit be the resolution of the election. Making it easier to make hay with the electorate and shifting blame to everyone but themselves and their failed conservative policies.

I'm thinking that we should, concertedly, reach out to the Bs and form some sort of coalition. Perhaps based around public vs private and the separation of money making from social policy. A divorce with Voodoo Economics.

I think it could be done, but it requires us to not shit upon New Dealers and Outside Insiders, which is hard because it is so offensive.

And, if we keep in mind that movement variable, giving the New Dealers structural and electoral support will move the electorate and the system in our direction. ... back to the Overton Window... What year is this? 2004? '06?

Anyway, I'm rather excited about this idea. I think that the A+B+C with some kind of ideological movement modifier could be a nice political tool. It probably exists somewhere. If it doesn't we've got some SMath guys (science/math) here.

How do you mathematically represent the kind of movement of the entire set? Parentheses, variable squared?

up
0 users have voted.

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

Lily O Lady's picture

Democratic Party fixed up just the way they like it, with their art work on the walls and just the right carpets and drapes. They're not about to move out. They're just waiting for all the moderate Republicans to move in with them, now that things are so familiar for GOPers. Lifelong Dems like me may see it as an alien environment, but the Clintons figure they own us. They haven't noticed we moved on months ago. After all, where are we gonna go? They don't realize that we don't care anymore.

up
0 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

Phoebe Loosinhouse's picture

It's a definite thing/ color scheme they seem to be promoting and it is the color that results when you mix blue and red. Maybe they'll start a new foundation - the Purple Foundation to promote moderates of both parties who will work together to pass trade pacts, expand fracking, gut the safety nets, reduce the deficits, self-off aquifers, privatize any remaining public education, etc. I just feel like something is brewing.

up
0 users have voted.

" “Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough.” FDR "

Lily O Lady's picture

rather than create a new one. The brand is closely associated with the party, in fact they are one and the same to all intents and purposes. They're just staging a take over of the GOP as well. Why own one party when you can own two? Sounds very Clintonian to me.

up
0 users have voted.

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"