General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn Iowa, Bernie Sanders calls for a revolution
"AMES, Ia. Bernie Sanders told liberal Iowans Tuesday that he won't run for president unless he's certain millions of Americans are willing to launch a revolution.
"There's no way we are going to address the problems facing this country without a political revolution," Sanders, an independent U.S. senator from Vermont told an audience of 200-plus in a church basement in Ames.
"I have not yet decided whether I'm going to run or not," he said after someone in the audience yelled "Run Bernie!" and others applauded.
Sanders said it's extremely difficult to take on "the oligarchy" the Koch brothers, who are worth $85 billion and are building the most powerful political organization in the country, Wall Street, drug companies, and other economic entities that spend unlimited money in politics to "literally buy candidates."
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2014/12/16/bernie-sanders-calls-revolution/20494315/
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Faux pas
(14,583 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It's an oligarchy, and it won't be changed without a sea of demand for real, fundamental change. Not change around the edges.
IMO we are being propagandized right now to perceive Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders as roughly equivalent "change" candidates, when they really aren't.
Warren isn't a change candidate on the MIC. Warren isn't a change candidate on the police state. I went to her "issues" page, and I think she will cut Social Security.
No unnecessary cuts or risky privatization schemes. (Jul 2012)
Modest changes will save Social Security, not privatization. (Apr 2012)
Opposes investing part of your payroll tax. (Oct 2012)
Sponsored keeping CPI for benefits instead of lower "Chained CPI". (Apr 2013)
Rated 100% by ARA, indicating a pro-Trust Fund stance. (Jan 2013)
No "unnecessary" cuts? Really? What "modest changes"?
Her talk is very good on the banks, but the PTB will easily be able to say that she can't get anything done there because of Republicans. I don't see her talking about our shredded Bill of Rights, and I don't see much on her "issues" page suggesting that she won't continue most of the very same war and police state policies that are destroying this nation.
I don't trust any of this hype around her. By my observation, half of the Obama cheerleading squad is now backing Warren, and there is great, deliberate theater being whipped up everywhere, in the MSM and across the internet, about whether or not she will run. I think it's an attempt to get people to rally and fall in line behind her without actually looking at her agenda. It reminds me of all the weird attention by the MSM months ago, when they were elevating Elizabeth by publicizing all Hillary's supposedly inadvertent "gaffes" about being poor like poor people.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders is being almost utterly ignored, which is standard behavior by the MSM toward any candidate they genuinely don't want included in the national conversation.
We live in a propaganda state now, run by those who know exactly what we want to hear. I don't trust this hype around Elizabeth at all.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)she's a hawk.
If Elizabeth Warren is emerging as a kind of spokeswoman for the new economic populism that many Democratic activists want the party to embrace heading into 2014 and 2016, this speech that Warren is currently delivering on the floor of the Senate suggests the push to expand Social Security could become a key issue in the argument over the Democratic Party of the future.
In remarks Warren just began delivering, she strongly endorsed the push to boost Social Security benefits in keeping with Senator Tom Harkins proposal to do the same and condemned the Chained CPI that liberals fear Dems will embrace in strong terms. From the prepared remarks:
The most recent discussion about cutting benefits has focused on something called the Chained-CPI. Supporters of the chained CPI say that its a more accurate way of measuring cost of living increases for seniors. That statement is simply not true. Chained CPI falls short of the actual increases in costs that seniors face, pure and simple. Chained CPI? Its just a fancy way of saying cut benefits.Social Security isnt the answer to all of our retirement problems. We need to find ways to tackle the financial squeeze that is crushing our families. We need to help families start saving again. We need to make sure that more workers have access to better pensions. But in the meantime so long as these problems continue to exist and so long as we are in the midst of a real and growing retirement crisis a crisis that is shaking the foundations of what was once a vibrant and secure middle class the absolute last thing we should be doing is talking about cutting back on Social Security" http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/18/elizabeth-warren-dont-cut-social-security-expand-it/
polichick
(37,152 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)aggiesal
(8,864 posts)way to subtlely hijack the conversation.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)it was an explanation...
And as far as the OP goes, Bernie is right, he will run as a populist and they will go after him mercilessly, what he's saying is "I'm clean and can get through this but I won't do it unless you are all with me"...
I'm with him. Whatever I can do.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Perfectly said...Thank you.
Me, too...and everyone I can possibly bring along.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)are informed enough to want it. I do believe that is happening, which is why we are seeing the militarized police on the streets of our cities. To make it known that people should not get any ideas.
But that is not the way for the people to do it, on the streets. The way to weaken them is DON'T BUY THEIR STUFF, take away their money, don't go to the streets and become a target for their demonstration of how powerful they are.
Boycotts, strikes etc work much better.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)you are right, that those are the kinds of things that are going to have to happen.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Sorry about that truth hurts business...a revolution is not in the making. Were you here for the last two midterms?
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)I am usually in agreement with you, Sabrina, but not on this one.
Boycotts don't work. Legislative change has become nigh impossible with our bought and sold so-called "representatives" doing first the will of our Corporate Overlords.
When enough people are willing to go into the streets and shut things down - then we will see change. At great cost, yes. But all other avenues have been blocked.
I would like to hope that "in the streets" can be conducted with non-violence.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)NewDeal_Dem
(1,049 posts)spent a lot of his Presidency in the throes of early alzheimers, not that I think sanders is anywhere near that -- but he's old, and he'll be older come election time.
I'd like to see him out there pushing his issues, but does he have the strength for the presidency?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)adirondacker
(2,921 posts)I have errands to run today and won't be back until later tonight, but will be interested in the comments that this article produces.
Ciao for now.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)What is radical is the transformation we have seen in this government from representative democracy to oligarchy.
Bernie stands for the very ideas and principles that Democrats *used to* stand for, decades ago.
from a post by bvar22:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=385832
In 1966 I joined the Democratic Party for these values:
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for allregardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
*The right of every family to a decent home;
*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
*The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.---FDR, SOTU, 1944
Please note that the above are stipulated as Basic Human RIGHTS to be protected by our government,
and NOT as COMMODITIES to be SOLD to Americans by For Profit Corporations.
My vote and support WILL go to whoever BEST embodies these values.
I am too old and tired to again support the Least of the Worst again.
Let the chips fall where they may.
Thank you for this excellent thread.
world wide wally
(21,719 posts)"founding fathers" and not been sent out of the room.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)calimary
(80,699 posts)Nothing will happen without MILLIONS of Americans behind it, and with him.
polichick
(37,152 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I view the potential candidacy as one of the greatest vehicles we have now for building it. Making the need for it explicit, and growing it into existence.
polichick
(37,152 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Thanks.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)he gets the backing of millions and we need him to run to get those millions to back him.
What I heard him say is that he believes that he and his family would be attacked. I think he is right. The Oligarchs can and have gotten away with ruining lives and, IMO, murder. We need Sen Sanders but is it fair to ask him to make that sacrifice w/o the backing that would make it meaningful?
calimary
(80,699 posts)I keep thinking back to Michael Moore. Had a chance to interview him once. And he talked about what the wrong-wing has done to him personally, posting his personal information, and that of his wife and kids, his address, phone number, photos of his home and his neighborhood, his kids' school, and more. And THEY'RE the ones who can do something bad about it. More often than not, THEY'RE the ones with the guns. THEY'RE the ones with the Gibraltar-sized chip on their shoulder. THEY'RE the ones who are the paranoiacs and the "Stand Yer Ground'ers" and the cliven bundy pals and supporters. THEY'RE the ones living in the 6th Century. THEY'RE the ones who let their closed-mindedness and hate for everyone not exactly like them or exactly their skin color. THEY'RE the ones who yammer about pro-life, pro-life, pro-life, and determine to do something about it by murdering doctors and health care workers. THEY'RE the ones.
Just consider. What do the active participants and front-liners on that side of the aisle tend to do when they feel somehow "persecuted" and "victimized"?
Compare it to what active participants and front-liners on OUR side tend to do. Our side tends to do sit-ins, "die-ins," protest marches, "peace-ins," hunger strikes, chaining themselves to trees against the lumber industry, chaining themselves to fences surrounding nuclear weapons sites. Laying across railroad tracks where trains carrying nukes and/or toxins are expected. And so forth. WE don't stalk, grab our guns, stockpile assault weapons, bully and menace people in stores and fast-food joints shoving our assault rifles in their field of vision, and shoot-to-kill because somebody cut us off in traffic or we didn't like the loud music they played or we didn't like "their kind" in our neighborhoods.
OUR SIDE TENDS NOT TO DO THAT SHIT.
It's the OTHER side of the aisle whose minions tend to gravitate toward that shit.
Were there any liberals out there armed to the teeth and taking sniper positions aiming at law enforcement officers with that cliven bundy jerk? Are those CONs out there marching with the signs that say "I Can't Breathe"? Are those liberals accosting and badgering and threatening frightened young women attempting to enter some Planned Parenthood center - for WHATEVER reason? Is it the liberals who want to jam one narrow form of one religion down the throats of all America?
So I can understand and sympathize with this concern, and I'd completely understand if that's how Bernie Sanders feels. If it were me, I'd be worried for my family, too. They're non-combatants. He probably expects the venom and bile and hatred spewed at him. But he surely doesn't want to subject his family to that. I don't blame him. It's getting to be a dangerous game. Those of us who worry - "hope so-&-so stays out of small planes" and other such concerns - have good reason to do so.
Which is CLEARLY a strong reason to point out that this movement really can't get off the ground or have any significant impact if there aren't MILLIONS of us geared up, activated, ready, AND willing.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)information so long. The revolution is simmering and the Oligarchs know it. I think the Deep State let Obama win in 2008 to quiet the masses. Give them their "savior" and then cut him down with no cooperation from the Brown Shirts (Republicans).
I think Sen Sanders knows we are not yet ready. I think the Deep State is ready to try another Republican in Jeb. The BFEE is powerful. I don't know if the also powerful Koch Family is on board. They may want their own candidate, like Chrispy Christy. Of course the Deep State will also back H. Clinton as a fall back.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The relevant battle is the One Percent and their purchased politicians, versus the rest of us.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I wish I didn't, but I do.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)aggiesal
(8,864 posts)Big difference between "... Calls for a Revolution" and
"... Calls for a Political Revolution."
One implies violence, another implies voting activism.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)violence. It is time for a revolution. By the way, unless I missed it, you haven't said how you feel one way or the other about what the OP is about.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Try to smear any acknowledgement of the need to address deep and pervasive corporate corruption of our government as somehow radical or dangerous rather than necessary.
2naSalit
(86,061 posts)Bernie is right, as he often is. I have been wondering when "things" would get to the point where anyone would mention the "R-word".
Interesting times we live in. I have often wondered how a nation of allegedly high overall education level could let things get so far up on this crag before deciding that the direction needs to be changed.
*sigh* At least that phrase has hit the open air, now let's see how and what is needed to succeed in that (or any other) positive direction.
Thanks for posting this.
2na
madokie
(51,076 posts)and the good part is its all coming from the heart.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)JEB
(4,748 posts)More truth from this one person than the rest of both houses combined.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Maybe he's setting the stage for the shift away from capitalism to a uniquely American economic socialist system.
As a leader on the budget committee he will now be able to point out specifically the flaws of capitalism.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)him ever once advocate the public ownership of the means of production (a core concept of socialism)?
I like him, but he stil believes in capitalism, at least if his public utterances and stances can be trusted.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)and, in particular, the very policies that Democrats *used* to stand for, before they sold out to Wall Street and the MIC.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)not a scientific fact. That means there is no exact definition or core concept that empirically defines socialism.
It can be molded to an American vision.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)The question is, said Alice, whether you can make words mean so many different things.
The question is, said Humpty Dumpty, which is to be master thats all.
~Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Bernie is going to be savagely attacked because of his "socialist" label. Let Bernie be the master of his defense by allowing him all the flexibility and creativity he needs to present his vision.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)will change his party registration to 'Democrat' for the 2016 campaign remains to be seen.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)He is a DEMOCRATIC socialist so to change to the DEMOCRATIC party that has already appointed him to budget committee leadership position doesn't seem to pose any obstacles.
He is the MASTER of his choices and he sure is letting everyone know where he stands
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)the only people who bought it were old white racist people who believe everything they watch on FOX news. The more they cry wolf and try to demonize socialism the more they will normalize it. I say bring it on.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Let Bernie normalize it in his own way, not another's "core concepts".
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)if you run, Senator.
riqster
(13,986 posts)[bloc.kquote]
freshwest
(53,661 posts)riqster
(13,986 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)Without a third party or mass movement/protest not much is going to change.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)understand if he decides the reward isn't worth the risk. The Oligarchs would make his life miserable.
nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)national platform for his message. That's not insignificant itself.
Run Bernie run!
Aerows
(39,961 posts)We have gotten of kilter and SOMETHING has to change to readjust our nation's moral compass.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Our democracy itself and along with it the moral bearings of this nation have been stolen from us and deeply perverted.
Bernie sees the larger picture.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Please run Bernie. We need someone who will stand up for the American people.
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)process. I'm ready as well!
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)"Revolution"
You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're all doing what we can
But if you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright, al...
You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You'd better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright