Future of the Democratic Party

I think progressive forces should ditch it and disband it. Lending support for Democratic Party means supporting the two-party system and ultimately legitimicing one party rule. Republicans need the legitimicy given by "opposition" more than progressives need a Party of Institutional Loosers and Enablers, which, let's face it, is equally corrupt. If Republicans are denied the focus given by opposition, they too will ultimately break down.

Soviet Union and US needed each other to divide and rule the world; and so do Republicans and Democrats need each other to divide and rule Americans. Stop playing their game, join the Greens, Socialists or start a new party, let the DLC keep their "moderate" center party.

Just cut and run. Don't work for reform. Go to a party that is completely marginalized. Do it all within the first three weeks of the election.

All because our buddies in the media have spun the news to make this look like an utter disaster?

Way I see it, that's gonna work like windshield wipers on a duck's ass.

My analysis is that the system is so rigged - especially Congress, which is the most important body - that it is impossible for progressives to win a fight head on. So to work for real reform - not just status quo - it is time to change tactics to guerilla warfafe, run, but pick a new weapon while running. Tactic is based on the assumption that decentralicing process in Democratic Party would decentralice also the other party and break it, it cannot be proven but I'm convinced it's the best shot currently available.

Progressives are marginalized, and unless they realize it and join the party of marginalized and make their voice heard, they will remain only enablers of the one party rule that is very close to becoming rule of one nation, one state, one party, one leader...

And that perception being bandied about so irresponsibly is what gives comfort to moderates voting for Republicans. After all, they were assured by leftist knowitalls that there is no difference.

that there are major differences ...

not all leftist knowitalls fail to recognize the critically important differences between the two major parties ... just wanted to clarify that ...

There were major differences between Soviet Union and US, that doesn't mean progressives should have taken sides.

The real fight is for hearts and minds of people, if one true progressive and believes that better world is possible. Political parties are tools to be used and discarded when they are no longer considered usefull. Partisanship is divisive and destructive, and that's what TPTB like to do, divide people, divide and rule.

let me be clear about this, i am not certain whether I will remain a registered Democrat ... you can read my little essay on the current state of my thinking on this issue right here ...

you wrote: Republicans need the legitimicy given by "opposition" more than progressives need a Party of Institutional Loosers and Enablers, which, let's face it, is equally corrupt. If Republicans are denied the focus given by opposition, they too will ultimately break down.

I strongly support the development of third parties ... i think Democrats were wrong to block the active participation of third parties in this year's elections ... but to see the Democratic Party only as an enabling force for the Republicans and to see it as "equally corrupt" goes a bit off the deep end ...

While I would love to indulge my most idealist beliefs and align myself with those who most closely match my views, I find myself trying to walk a tightrope ... especially in these most dire times, I see it as selfish to ignore nearterm pragmatic constraints ... what does this mean? it means that we need to balance our political energies between building for the future and dealing with the present ... and the present realities are that we have a two party system ...

working for change in a third party is one thing; voting, on the national level, for third party candidates is something entirely different ... you labelled the Democratic Party as enablers ... i would use that very label for those in contested states who voted for third party candidates instead of Kerry ... bush is the most dangerous threat to the continuity of our democracy we've ever been confronted with ... we needed and still need to do all we can to stop him from implementing his maniacal agenda ... and in that battle, we should not create rifts between democrats and anyone else opposed to the neo-con policies ... i have many disappointments with the democratic party, but unity of all who are anti-republican has never been more important ...

for this reason, I see your thinking, at least for now, as divisive and unproductive ... we need to utilize the structure of the existing two party system and bend it as best we can to serve our needs ... to throw it out with the bathwater is nothing but a scorched earth policy ...

and the smartest tactic for us is to strengthen those progressive Democrats by giving them an activist constituency who also understand there are still significant shared goals with the moderates of the party.

I come from multiparty parliamentary system with long history of compromise making and consensus policies, so I have different experience. I don't see breaking up parties and shifting allegiance as divisiveness but as way to force institutionalized political structures to stay in touch with people, at least a bit.

What comes to "pragmatic constraints" in situations like Presidential election, which is just one part of the picture, nothing is in the way of progressive and moderate forces co-operating, even if they mainly work through different parties. We saw that happening in this campaign, especially between Cobb(?) and Kerry campaigns and to lesser extent with Nader, and now Greens have taken the forefront in the recount campaigns, no doubt in cooperation with at least some Democratic forces who prefer to keep low profile.

What was very very bad in the campaign was that as DLC and Kerry tried to repeat Clinton, they suffocated all progressive voices, which were denied possibility to educate and win the hearts and minds of people through their arguments, by telling the truth to the people. As long as progressives succumb to being silent partners of the DLC, they accomplish nothing, only make Bushista coupsters stronger. How many times DLC needs to loose before progressives choose to learn from experience? For twenty years the tide has been to the right. How can we turn it, if we only ride it?

one of the best things that could happen in the U.S. would be the emergence of strong third parties ... i would love to see the kind of coalition politics you described ...

those of us on the left have some difficult choices to make ... fighting from inside the Democratic Party has many advantages and many disadvantages ...

one the one hand, we have an existing structure; we are not trying to build a new party from ground zero ... there are many within the party following the lead of people like Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich who are trying to gain a greater voice ... it is a large and growing movement with real possibilities of making meaningful change ... is there any reason not to give this new movement a chance to grow?

on the other hand, parties like the Democratic Socialists of America and the Greens have already established themselves ... as you stated, there is no reason why these parties couldn't join together with Democrats where they share a common interest ...

the only place I disagree with you is when you state that progressives have succumbed to being silent partners and that we are only "riding the tide" rather than trying to change it ... many of us are trying to change the tide and I for one see at least some hope that we are starting to succeed ... at this point in time, it is not clear to me whether i would be more effective working to change the party from within or leaving to work with a third party ... only time will tell ...

major differences between lefty knowitalls and leftist knowitalls. I'd say by the formidable intellect and the great depth of sincerity shown in your posts you are a needed force on the left.



;)))))))))

nice of you to say ...

you, too, have my deepest respect ... we are not the same, but we are fighting the same fight ...

I work with lots of conservatives, and am considerably younger than most of them, and they try to tell me that the left and right are equally corrupt.

Why is it then, that it seems everyday we hear about some Repugnican and the millions of dollars he/she/they stole from indigent people, crimes that (when convicted) usually leave them with a shorter sentence (if any) than a marijuana offender?

And why is it, that the only significant democratic scandal in the last 15 years was a blowjob in the oval office? (No wonder the right exerted so much time, energy, money, and gab when Billy met Monica; it was their only shot, and they had to let out all their misguided hate and agression at once.)

The Repugs, on the other hand, are so corrupt that Dems don't know where to focus their attention.

This is our moment in time--IF we can pick up a few big money backers who are true progressives, instead of the faux liberals who seem to infest the party.

We need to start an information war, paving the way for progressive candidates in the primaries of 2008.

A 3rd party? Maybe. Or maybe we should just concentrate on preparing Iowa and Nwe hampshire to vote for progressive Democrats. Start saturating those states with articles, advertisements, radio and TV infomercials dealing with the advantages of the progressive agenda. Show how progressive taxation works in Europe to pay for universal healthcare, longterm unemployment and other social safety benefits.

But I'm afraid if PDA stays allied to DLC instead of allying with Greens, they won't accomplish anything.

quote from your beloved website:

"And so as President Bush embarks on the beginning of an historic second term-an opportunity only given to 14 men in our nation’s history-he has the opportunity to confound his critics, heal a divided nation, and correct America’s course in the world.

He can do this and become a great President, or he can submit to the more ideological base in his party, continue the division, and leave office with America still at war with itself and with public opinion in much of the rest of the world."

that, and no mention of voter fraud.

look elswhere, my friend.

but I'm not ready to do it yet. I think that we really need to rid the Democratic Party of the DLC centrist faction and push the party leftwards. Bill pretty much pissed me off in 1994 when he let Newt set the agenda and went centrist.

1. we need to be a real opposition party ... if the activists (do not assume this means the lefties or the moderates) fail to see party leaders and elected Democrats taking the fight to the republicans on each and every issue, we will continue to do poorly ...

2. we need a well crafted, consistent message that is unified with a set of core beliefs ... too often, we end up in laundry list hell without a central, unifying theme ...

3. we need great communicators ... every day, on every talk and news program, fighting Democrats have to be present ... and every day, the central themes and underlying policies need to be repeated over and over and over and over ...

4. we need to be a party with bona fide grassroots energy ... the Democratic Party in my town meets for an hour or two every two or even every four years ... that's a prescription for electoral failure ... here in Massachusetts, the state of all those liberal democrats, we keep electing republican governors ... TAKE A HINT !!! we need to create regular contact between the party and its membership ... we need to cajole people into getting involved ... we need to make Democrats understand that if they give a damn, and many of them do, they can't just cast one vote every four years ...

if we did these things for starters, we would become a force to be reckoned with ... all the nonsense about finding better candidates or moving to the left or to the right is total jibberish ...

we have real work to do ... i'm very worried that party leaders don't have a clue how to summon the great energies of party members ... i do see a ray of hope, however, after this last election ... maybe, just maybe, they're starting to hear our calls to them ... whether they will follow us and then help organize us or whether they will cling to their old ways of hoarding power remains to be seen ...

the truth is the Democratic Party, in its current incarnation, is really not a political party at all ... in fact, it's not really any kind of party at all ... democrats have a long way to go to rebuild their majority ... and that what brung us where we be ain't what we need more of ... it's time to start taking care of business ... and their ain't much damned time left ...

and say what we feel is right without extensive internal debate over who it woult upset.

and run candidates without kissing corporate rings.

We can still vote any way we want, but the dems are not getting the message that progressives are sending them.

It appears the party leadership is sticking to the middle-of-the-road strategy, despite all the humiliation it has brought the party. TTFN.

Progressives need to come to terms that Reagan moved the country right. In order to win, we need a political center, middle america candidate. If you don't care about winning, then ditch. If you want to win, hold your nose.

Until the past few years. Let the idiot lemmings (average unthinking middle American) start HURTING ... really hurting economically and we'll bring back Unions and our continuing quest for social justice.

Unfortunately the average American does not take the time to become socially aware and read newspapers much less journals and magazines.

Patience dear fellow DUers ... I'd bet the trend will show signs of beginning as early as 2006 and we'll have a Democratic Majority in the Senate, if not closing in on the House by 2008.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/international/europe/23CND-UKRA.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5094&en=824922d4036ac304&hp&ex=1101272400&partner=homepage


Thousands of Ukrainans Refuse to Accept Election Results
By C. J. CHIVERS

Published: November 23, 2004


As the anxious rally continued through Sunday night to Monday morning, then through Monday, at times the crowd chanted, "Freedom cannot be stopped!"
There were signs of careful planning and organization, which suggested the protesters were prepared for a long standoff. Within minutes of the opposition leaders' speeches in the morning, for example, young men set up rows of new tents in the crowd.
Food quickly appeared, as did blankets, foam mattresses, hats and winter coats. As the work continued, posters were taped to the tents and to some of the protesters' winter coats. They were messages to the police. "Don't shoot!" they read.

economic demise.

Isn't unrealistic. If I was going to pray, I'd pray for better leaders and more separation church and state and an organized opposition to this election.

(i.e. if you try and split the party, you will NEVER be able to gain the amount of votes necessary to elect ANYONE); or we can waste our time with these "i'm taking my ball and going home" scenarios. i'd rather work on fixing what's wrong rather than wasting my time dreaming about what can never be; but hey, that's just me...

IMOFO

we were when Clinton was in power (and I'm a fan of Clinton).

Pro-life and creationism is just around the corner.

creationism certainly is not, nor is "pro-life". they may attempt to portray "greater respect for those who hold differing opinions", but will never adopt either of those planks.

They only push to the right. I'm tired of it.

voting machines are still used in strategic districts.

The real problem with so called "moderate" Clintonites is that they still are in state of denial.

The reality is that you allready live under populist fascist regime - the real thing, not the Hollywood caricature of Evil Nazi Fascism. The reality is that there is well over 50% likelihood that US will be hit with worse depression than 30's AND Peak Oil effects during the next four years, rather sooner than later. I can promise you that you won't like the fascist response to these "problems", and that DLC democrats cannot and will not do anything effectual to fight back. They rather cooperate with fascism (like social democrat moderates in 30's Germany) than allie with progressives (like communist radicals in 30's Germany) to fight against fascism.

Do not even consider trying it on the national level. If you've studied the Constitution, you know it is all but impossible for a third-party candidate to ever win the presidency.

The so-called two-party system is not a matter of 'opening people's minds to new possibilites' or whatever. It is ingrained in the process designated by the Constitution itself. Until that changes, it will remain so.

Just dividing the progressive vote into chaos will never persuade 67 Senators and an overwhelming majority of Congress to alter a system that they believe favors them. It would take an effective, widespread shift in public opinion across ideological boundaries, and intense pressure upon much of the legislature. Indeed, internal discord in our side will reinforce it.

Why not end all chance of anything we want getting done? Let's go all out and just give up altogether.