The physics of the Democratic party demise

Don't worry, this article will not be filled with wonderful mathematic formulas, but is to be inferred in a perhaps allegorical way.

First a statement of the constituents in the physical problem present: political parties. Currently, there are "two" primary political parties, which is more semblance than reality. Multiple minor other parties are always present but only rarely replace a major party, such as the end of the Whig party before our first civil war (what's the second civil war? We're in it now).

Then there is the necessary confined space which the pressure/volume (PV) relation necessitates.
We actually have, for purposes of national politics two fixed-volume containers, known as the Senate and the House of Representatives. Let us fix our gaze upon the more capacious of the two chambers, the House of Representatives (HR). Fixed by law HR can only have a fixed number of constituents. Although there can be fewer constituents (and by constituents, I do NOT include the voting or non-voting public, but only those elected (selected) to allegedly perform the duties of office. Ostensibly those duties were fiduciary in respect to the population: decisions were supposed to be made in relationship to the COMMON good, however that may be envisioned. Now of course the fiduciary duties have been appropriated by campaign donors, in whatever form the monetary infusions are made.

So the heart of the PV is that for a fixed volume, at a fixed temperature, only so much material can fit a given container in order to maintain a fixed pressure. The container currently contains 415 components, maximum. These components exist in many sizes, shapes, colors, and odors inside the container. Adding more constituents into the already filled container is impermissible because of Constitutional limitations. The chamber was purposely designed to contain a certain volume.

Who are the constituents? At the current time, I believe all are either red or blue, but in some past configurations, a few "trace elements" find their way into the chamber, before they are chased out by the big players who don't want any "outside" competition.

The current contents of the container are red and blue. Theoretically each red and each blue member represents a certain hardness which prevents them to be compressed. In that way, the "molecules" exert counterpressures against each other, proportionate to the relative numbers. I hope I haven't lost too many of you so far.

But in certain situation, the "hardness" of the constituents varies. When one of the two major constituents become numerically inferior by a significant amount (a not readily definable number), all the members of the constituent class lose "hardness" and thus are compressed by the other major constituent class.

In political terms, this means that when the Democrats lose a certain amount of numbers in the chamber, they ALL lose influence, so that Republicans expand in power to fill the lapse in Democratic counter-pressure. In other words, a once formidable obstacle to Republicans has become so weakened as to not to be able, with their current chamber constituents, to engage in significant legislative "pressure" or counter pressure.

Where is this all leading? Remember, every two years constituents are reassembled within the chamber. In 2018, the Democratic party, already hit by waves of desertion, will be further weakened--and in some cases willingly--by those in power resistant to change. Approximately half of the pre-2016/Bernie Democratic party still remaining amongst possible voters have abandoned the Democratic Party.

One-half of the D party, either through non-voting, cross-over voting, third party voting, will NOT return to the D party. Establishment D's would sooner lose to an R than to a Progressive. This has been shown time after time. Despite disillusionment with Trump, for which there is great cause, non-R's may yet vote for R's and the majority of disaffected former D's will go elsewhere. There will be no great D resurgence in 2018 mid-terms, especially if Obama and Medusa stick their noses back into the game. (BHO didn't do very well halting Brexit; HRC lost an election almost impossible to lose). Most likely, except in NY and CA, another cadre of R's will enter the container, further diminishing the D's counter pressure, rendering D's TOTALLY ineffective. Up to now the D's have been ineffective by choice. In 2018, D's will be ineffective, even if they wanted to be so otherwise (which they don't), because there will be obviously too few of them.

Pressure Volume relation in 2020

Regardless of whether Trump is impeached or not, the D's will not gain votes. They still have no message. They still only offer the status quo of elitism, austerity, and suppression. The kicker here is whether a third party can gain enough traction to effectively insert itself into the current two color chamber. Such an event would exert pressure on remaining D's and even R's. The D's, as we know them, are a dying party, ruled over by an ancient team of sell-outs. It is unlikely that enough establishment D's will get re-elected to maintain the current malfunction.

Okay, you say, what about the "rising stars" of the corporatist D party, such as Kamala the Camel Harris or Booker T. Booker or Kirsten Gillibrand? As of now, all 3 are so openly beholden to the Obama/Clinton establishment as to be incapable of drawing back former grassroots D's. They will lose nationally even though their home states are very blue.

So, the end of the D's is in sight. Rich donors having not reaped return on investment from Medusa and other puppets. With declining numbers of D's, they will less likely support other D's for the ROI reason. Remaining grass roots members will be, and already are, disinclined to contribute to the D's.

This part of the equation is simple: Less Money = Less D's.

Now for the consequences:

Scenario 1: A third party, most likely headed by Bernie will rise from the ashes of the D party. They will be a minority party--but so will the remaining establishment D's. Alone neither faction will be effective, leaving the R's in complete control.

Scenario 2: Regardless of a left-of center--or even center--D / Indie Party constituency, R's will have overwhelming legislative control. And here is the R's Achilles heel.

The R's Achilles heel

As the non-R counter pressure diminishes, the R's will expand. But the R's are not as monolithic as some think. They are currently fracture prone into several constituents:
1. Trumpista
2. Establishment / NeverTrump
3. Libertarian / Tea Party

With the demise of the D's the R's have quite a good chance of fracturing.

Now assume that each former pseudo-monolithic party fractures into at least two significant subcomponents each. That leaves 4 contenders in the political arena. But the coalitions will not be rigid. On points of agreement several of the factions may unite, whereas at points of disagreement, the coalition will cease. This is what I consider an almost parliamentary system. We already have a King who rules over the President. (The King is corporate giants / elites).

This whole situation is dependent upon one factor besides volume and constituents. That is Temperature. The temperature is rising. Political as well as economic discontent is rising. Not coincidentally the rising climate temperatures also worsen social temperatures. People in hot weather are more prone to violent acts than people in cooler climates.

Hypothesis

There are two possible outcomes from this current political situation:

1. Peaceful disassembly of the constituent political parties

2. Violent explosion.

We are at a point of no return--not just in a climatic sense but in a political sense. Why this is true could be a subject for another essay. But true it is.

Either the two parties divide or explosion comes.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

k9disc's picture

What does our mediascape have lying around for this situation?

Kind of reminds me of Disaster Capitalism; how the political ideas "lying around" get put into play during a crisis.

Man, someone could really clobber a book on the corporate media cartels in the same vein as the Shock Doctrine.

up
0 users have voted.

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

Alligator Ed's picture

From Tim Canova:

Since 2011, nearly half a million Syrians have been killed, 6.3 million have been displaced, and millions more have been reduced to utter destitution, according to Christian Solidarity International (CSI-USA), an international human rights organization. The Syrian war has also led to the largest refugee crisis in Europe since World War II and one of the largest humanitarian crises of all time.

U.S. policy should not be providing money, training, weapons, intelligence, and anti-tank missiles to terrorist groups allied with Al-Qaeda, Islamic State in Iraq & Syria (ISIS), or other offshoot groups. If we have learned nothing else from the failures of the Bush administration’s war in Iraq and the more recent war of regime change in Libya, it’s the folly of overthrowing secular regimes, however repressive, in the heart of the Middle East. As we’ve seen in Iraq and Libya, the resulting power vacuum will be filled by the most violent extremists supported by competing regional powers, particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran. The resulting chaos is never contained within the region. Instead, we’ve seen growing terrorist attacks and threats all over the world, including in the U.S. and Europe.

Congressional action is needed. That’s why I support a bipartisan proposal, the “Stop Arming Terrorists Act of 2017” (S. 532 and H.R. 608), introduced by Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) to prohibit the U.S. government from using taxpayer dollars to provide arms or any kind of support to terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, or the countries that are providing direct or indirect support to such groups.

I am not waiting to be elected to Congress to take a stand on this issue. In addition, I have called for arms control and arms reduction agreements, not just for weapons of mass destruction, but also for all kinds of conventional weapons sold to dangerous regimes around the world. We do not need more huge weapons sales to belligerents or more covert programs that arm terrorist groups. Please call and urge your House Representative and Senators to cosponsor this legislation by dialing (202) 224-3121.

According to James Lyon, Retired U.S. Navy Admiral and former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, “There is no such thing as a moderate jihadi terrorist arming one group of terrorists to fight another group of terrorists, which can only have one outcome: more terrorism. It’s time to slam the door on a wrong-headed and self-defeating policy.”

“This madness must end, we must stop arming terrorists,” said Representative Tulsi Gabbard, a veteran of two tours of duty in Iraq. “The government must end this hypocrisy and abide by the same laws that apply to its citizens,” Tulsi added while introducing this bill on the House floor.

This legislation would do the following:

Make it illegal for U.S government funds to be used to provide assistance to terrorists, including with weapons, munitions, intelligence, logistics, training, or cash;
Prohibit the U.S. government from providing such assistance to any nation that has given or continues to give such support to terrorists;
Instruct the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) to determine the individuals and groups that should be considered terrorists, including those affiliated or cooperating with Al-Qaeda, Jabhat Faten Al-Sham, or ISIS;
Instruct the DNI to determine the countries that are providing assistance to such terrorist groups or individuals;
Require the DNI to work with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, House Armed Services Committee, and the Select Committee on Intelligence to review and update the list of prohibited countries and terrorist groups every six months.

Building a more peaceful world will require the political will in all major arms producing countries to convert some significant portion of weapons manufacturing to useful civilian industries -- to beat swords into plowshares and for people and nations to finally reach peaceful resolutions to their age old conflicts. These efforts will require all of our support everyday.

This could be the nucleus for a new political coalition. Note the conjunction of 3 anti-war persons from two different parties. Whatever disdain one may feel for Libertarians, such as unregulated markets, I for one, must admire and cooperate with them on their antiwar platform. This is hopefully a guide for the new politics.

up
0 users have voted.

@Alligator Ed Tim Canova certainly sounds like an improvement over Wasserman-Shultz. I will contact my reps on S.532 and H.R.608, and while I'm at it continue to push H.R.676 aka Medicare for all.

up
0 users have voted.
enhydra lutris's picture

@Alligator Ed and terrorist orgs (& what about the CIA) as does Israel.

up
0 users have voted.

That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

@enhydra lutris You forget that when they are on our side the terrorists are known as "freedom fighters", just like the Founding Fathers of the USA.

up
0 users have voted.
Arrow's picture

Shouldn't that first line be...'in an alligatorical way' ? (I know...you were sleeping in the sun on a bank during English class at Alligator U.)

Good piece. And, I agree that we should work with anyone we have common views on issues.
You can see the latest debate/uproar about Caitlen Johnstone's essays.

up
0 users have voted.

I want a Pony!

Alligator Ed's picture

@Arrow but rarely succeed. Thanks for the kind words.

up
0 users have voted.

Because "I hate Trump" does play the roll of activation energy, just as "I hate Bush" did in 2006--perhaps the Dems will even take over the House, as they did in 2006--a return to Nancy "Impeachment is off the table" Pelosi and the politics of "Roll over and scratch my tummy" will seal the Dem party's doom, if by delaying it.

I prefer a fracturing of the container itself, by peaceful means hopefully. Blue states go one way, red states another, Alaska does whatever the hell it wants, leading to a more informal North American Union. Join Canada? Sure, if you want to. Join Mexico? Why not--provided their 19 family oligarchy ends (Viva Zapata!). But the current Corporate Fascism can not stand.

up
0 users have voted.
Alligator Ed's picture

@SancheLlewellyn but how would it work? Currently the only way I can see for a fractured container is with a constitutional convention. Once that occurs, the USA as we know it, deeply flawed as it is, will cease to exist--and with the current Republican majority of party-controlled states, the re-Constitution will not be to the liking of very many people at c99--or elsewhere.

up
0 users have voted.

@Alligator Ed @Alligator Ed Besides all Bible, all the time, what do you think the constitutional convention will do? Are there any particular articles you could link? I haven't read much more than a mention of it.

up
0 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

Alligator Ed's picture

@on the cusp I am an alligator. Unfortunately my esteemed alma mater, Alligator U. did not offer a law degree. Seriously, I have not got a specific link but several commenters to other diaries at c99 have outlined possible outcomes of such a debacle. Also there are available some YouTube videos on the topic of Constitutional Convention.

up
0 users have voted.

@Alligator Ed Well, lots of folks hate lawyers until they need one, so there's that. (I love uncontested adoptions! My favorite cases!)
All alligator shit aside, I want to be prepared so I can get away.
I can fake pray with the best of them.
Testify!
I just don't want to be around if Texas becomes an independent country again.

up
0 users have voted.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981

Alligator Ed's picture

@on the cusp I will say three (3) Pasta No Stirs, and eight (8) Hail Marinara, full of paste in order to wish anyone well. After all, it's the least (and I mean least) I could do.

up
0 users have voted.
Strife Delivery's picture

@SancheLlewellyn I think 2018 is going to be an interesting test. The Dems are hoping to ride the Trump wave and coast into power but they thought the same for 2016.

If people don't come to salvage the Dems for 2018, then that needs to be a clarion call to everyone that the party needs to die.

Ultimately, the Dems aren't the answer. What we need to figure out is what the answer should be.

up
0 users have voted.
Alligator Ed's picture

@Strife Delivery They are part of the problem. While a loss of seats in 2018 would be lethal to Dems, failure to GAIN a seat will be almost as bad. Please, have Hillary campaign in 2018! Please, please, please!

up
0 users have voted.
Strife Delivery's picture

@Alligator Ed Oh definitely I know the Dems aren't the answer. But there are those who still cling, perhaps strongly or perhaps just barely, that you can work within. That is garbage. The potential failure of 2018 should hopefully be a sign that folks should see that the Dems are the ultimate problem here.

up
0 users have voted.
WoodsDweller's picture

@Strife Delivery
There seems to be tiny bit of movement, Chuckie "the Shoe" Schumer was on the talk shows today mentioning the words "Single Payer", "Big Al" Gore came out for single payer this week. That represents some rhetorical distance from "Her Heinous" Clinton's statement that single payer would never happen. Probably just rhetoric, though. Like "Repeal Obamacare" it's easy to say things when nothing you say matters.
It seems like a day doesn't go by that there isn't another article on AlterNet about how the horrible division in the Democratic Party is to blame, racism and misogyny is to blame, Russia is to blame, all we need to do is get to 50% + 1 and everything will be fine.
The rate of movement, if indeed there is any, is going to be far too slow to compete against even the (literally) dying Republican Party.
Two toilets, side by side, flushed at the same time, who wins the race to the gurgle?
Stay turned for these important messages from our sponsors.

up
0 users have voted.

"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone

Strife Delivery's picture

@WoodsDweller I can agree but also disagree. 2016 definitely was a sign, with every possible favor being for Clinton and yet she lost. Every single possible favor in her corner, and she blew it. Against Trump.

The problem is though that instead of folks marching with their feet to say a 3rd party, it seems more and more folks just stay home. It's mixed for me I guess.

up
0 users have voted.
yellopig's picture

I hear 2018 will be a very hot year indeed.

Typo: actual number is 435, not 415.

up
0 users have voted.

“We may not be able to change the system, but we can make the system irrelevant in our lives and in the lives of those around us.”—John Beckett

Alligator Ed's picture

@yellopig However, in self-justification (a trait I learned from Medusa), many of the 435 are redundant or just plain useless.

up
0 users have voted.
MsGrin's picture

up
0 users have voted.

'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member

Alligator Ed's picture

@MsGrin Reality often not so much.

Sad

up
0 users have voted.
Big Al's picture

I can only think of W.C. Fields.

People been saying this stuff for decades and the cuopoly rolls along. People always think this time is different. It ain't.
It doesn't matter anyway, the revolution has to come from outside the political system so it doesn't matter what the two oligarchy parties do.

up
0 users have voted.
Alligator Ed's picture

@Big Al There is still a minuscule chance that duopoly party implosion could lead to multi-party rescue of our current political travesty. However, the chance of that happening is, well, like an alligator winning the Kentucky Derby.

up
0 users have voted.
Strife Delivery's picture

@Alligator Ed Kind of feel like an alligator may have a chance there...I mean, the alligator may be slow after eating 6 horses but he would make it across the finish line at least.

up
0 users have voted.