storm the field – Liberal Street Fighter
So, what’s it going to be? You’re disgusted with the Democratic Party, but you know damned well you’re not a Republican. There is always the choice that the biggest bloc of voters make: you can sit it out, avoid the political fray, proclaim “a pox on both their houses, they’re ALL crooked!”
Many, especially the cozy incumbent Vichy Dems and their well compensated consultant class, their bought-and-paid-for blog heelers, counsel you that you have no choice … either / or, Dempublican or Replocrat … you have to pick a side, join the team, get with the program. “WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO GO?”
In other words, be a fan, a spectator, sitting in the stands. Root,root, root for the home team. Wear the colors, buy the jersey, cheer when you’re told to. “Yes, we punt without gaining any yards, but we have a GAME PLAN,” the party poobahs proclaim. “Just wait, the other team is injured, falling apart … if we just keep hitting the basics, we’ll win in the end.” BE … A … SPECTATOR.
Is that really what you want your contribution to politics to be?
Many Americans know something is broken in our political system, and the source of that ill wind is us. For years, most Americans have been content to be either FANS of their particular party, or even worse, consumers. We treat politicians like celebrity athletes. This is not the role envisioned by our founders when they established this country as a republic, a place where a well-informed citizenry chooses representatives to carry out their wishes in the government. As Jefferson put it:
“Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories. And to render even them safe, their minds must be improved to a certain degree.” —Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XIV, 1782. ME 2:207
We stopped educating ourselves. We can blame it on the powers that be, but we LET them put us here. For too long, we’ve been content to be spectators, to be cheering fans for the American Team. Chants of “we’re number one” ring out across the political spectrum, and many of us can’t face when our government, when WE commit some evil, do some wrong, commit great crimes. We avoid responsibility.
When Americans have been truly exceptional, when we’ve added good to the world, it’s when we’ve been involved. Not always perfect, but trying to do good, to make a positive change. The Revolutionary War, labor movement, the suffrage movement, civil rights movement, the Marshall Plan … all of these things happened because we were engaged, more people than usual were active and involved in the day-to-day political life of the nation. MORE OF US BECOME FULL AND INVOLVED CITIZENS!
This is where we find ourselves. This is the choice we all face, the choice we need to help our neighbors and friends and families face:
ARE YOU A SPECTATOR OR A CITIZEN?
Both parties want you to stay on the sidelines, buy your tickets, show up when you’re told. Even in the minority, the entrenched office holders who promise you they’ll protect your rights benefit when the Republicans take them away, as they and their’s get to enjoy the perks, receive the benefits of being courtiers in the brave new feudal world.
So, you can keep cheering when you’re told, or you can keep raising hell. Raising hell, after all, is your real job if you’re a citizen in a Republic. So no matter how many fund-raising emails you get, no matter how many “wiser” folks tell you to shut up and play along, remember that a citizen is involved. A citizen stands up and asks the inconvenient questions. A citizen says no when their, or somebody else’s, rights are trampled on.
History shows that when people get off the sidelines they can force change. In the past, we’ve too often gotten the ball rolling, then settled back down, content once again to let our representatives run amok. Again from Jefferson:
“I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.” –Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:278
Take to the streets, write on a blog, send letters to the editor or your Senator or Representative, your Governor and state legislators. Talk to your neighbors. Join a third party. START a third party. Work with people involved in other issues to find common ground and work together. Build coalitons, construct bridges, question, learn and challenge yourself, challenge those who receive your precious vote.
Be a citizen.
Chicago Sports Fan Mickey from Epinions dot com
Rockwell’s “Freedom of Speech” from the Four Freedoms Exhibit at the Norman Rockwell Museum
citizen wilfred reporting for duty.
i’m ready for the work to bolster a 3rd Party and/or start a 4th one.
NeoCitizen prepared to become further enraged…OK…I mean urther engaged.
what worries me is before americans wake up and smell the coffee we’re going to have to have as many deaths as they had in europe in the mid 20th century.
europeans take politics more seriously.
because of all the people who died.
it would be nice if we could skip that. but americans are so stupid i dont think we can.
sad, but fucking true.
may we meet together, on the other side.
I am a citizen and I refuse to sit quietly bye while my country is destroyed from within. I don’t want to have to ask myself what I could have done. No matter what happens, I’ll know that I tried.
Photo by Frisco.
Citizen!!!!!!
Supersoling, I love that photo!
Citizens aren’t “meaningless” 🙂
I believe silence is complicity, and I will NOT silently comply with corruption snd dishonest governance: never have, never will. I will continue to speak up and out from wherever I am, to whoever I can reach.
I’ll be your citizen, and raise two more.
Yes you are, and thank you for that :o)
I’m thinking you’re good for 3 yourself… 🙂
“Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights, Get up stand up, don’t give up the fight.” COunt me in. Now that I have taken a little breather from the blogosphere, I am ready to fight on.
Supersoling…love that picture, wortth a million words.
This is a false dichotomy being presented. It assumes you can’t do all of this from within the Democratic Party, and paints all Democrats with the same broad brush used to paint Republicans.
It’s similar to wing-nut thinking.
I respect the motive, but the end result is an implicit endorsement of the neo-con, pseudo-fascist Bush Administration. Congratulations.
Can you explain this, please?
It’s similar to wing-nut thinking.
And this,
the end result is an implicit endorsement of the neo-con, pseudo-fascist Bush Administration.
as I tried to explain in the last thread in which we talked
again, is just not accurate. I can appreciate that it LOOKS like it from your point of view, but, and I speak only for myself here, it is an indictment of the entire poltical system as exemplified by the two corporate parties.
It’s similar to wingnut thinking in the sense that it requires absolute conformity with the black/white views of some on the left. An example is the view that a reasonable person can’t conclude that, although it was a huge mistake (crime) to go into Iraq, we can’t just pickup and leave immediately. Another example is that a reasonable person can’t conclude that, although she disagrees vehemently with Roberts’ ideologically, he should be confirmed because he has adequately demonstrated the qualifications for a Supreme Court justice and the President is afforded some level of deference under the Constitution. I can go on and on and on. I have seen it over and over again lately. It was essentially the view that Senator Obama was castigated for in the recent DKos exchange.
Some on the left have subscribed to the very “you’re either with us or against us” views that they despise in the Bush Administration. That is what bothers me – this lack of tolerance. Not only that, but they then paint the ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY with that same brush.
I think walking away from the Democrats at this point in history given what is at stake IS an unintentional, implicity endorsement of neo-con fascism.
I really respect much of what is said by the diarist. It is a call to arms that is badly needed. But fighting battles that will have no impact on the overall war is a tremendous waste of talented and passionate people. Choosing this point in time to build a third party ignores the reality that we face.
First off, I think there are major differences in overall attitude and views between here and dKos, but that is really here nor there (pun intended).
It feels like to me that every time you talk about this with us or against us attitude of the “left” that the same could easily be said for those who support the democratic party. Either you go along with the centrist push or get the hell out of our way — we have no need to make sure that your views are represented so STFU. See what I mean?
And for someone who is not abandoning the party becuase she was not a member of it in the first place, repeatedly telling me that I support Bush and his fascist policies is a slap int he face that in no way makes me want to spend my time and energy working for the democratic party.
I don’t ascribe the “with us or against us” view to the entire left. Just those who say the entire Democratic Party is a lost cause and the best way to “work” for change in this country is through a third party or by abandoning the entire Democratic Party. I am not asking ANYONE to go along with the centrist push, if there is such a thing. Neither is Obama, Kennedy, Boxer, etc. I don’t think most people are trying to push the party in either direction, they are focusing on getting the corrupt neo-con fascists out of power.
To ignore the only viable alternative is to implicitly endorse the pseudo-fascists. I am sorry that feels like a slap in the face. Sometimes the truth stings.
I want to further explain my use of this term.
What bothers me on the left is this idea that ONE vote that we don’t like, or even one statement, means that Representative or Senator is AGAINST us and should be cast aside.
Case in point. Joe Biden. He voted for the Bankruptcy Bill and that really, really pissed me off. I happen to practice law in an area very closely related to bankruptcy. I know how credit affects people’s lives. I know how bad this bill is. I am not a big fan of Joe Biden. I will work AGAINST him getting the Democratic nomination for President. But, does that mean I think there is NO DIFFERENCE between having him as our senator from Delaware and having someone like Rick Santorum or George Allen as our senator from Delaware? Hell friggin’ no! There is a HUGE difference.
This way of thinking, either you meet our checklist 100% or you must be cast aside, expands itself to the entire Democratic Party. Because SOME inside the Democratic Party are corrupt, because SOME inside the Democratic Party make bad choices, because SOME inside the Democratic Party want to move the entire party to the right, we will cast aside the entire party and try to build a third party instead, and effort that, in the extreme unlikelihood would ever be successful, would find success decades down the line at a time when the country had essentially been ruined by decades of GOP rule.
It is this way of thinking that I call similar to the way the wingnuts think. This painting of the entire Democratic Party with one brush and one color. This inability to see that on some issues reasonable people can disagree. This inability to see that a few bad decisions does not make a person evil. It disappoints me to see passionate, dedicated people succumbing to this way of thinking.
I don’t think that Biden is evil for voting for the bankruptcy bill — I think he is self-interested, as all politicians are. biden just happens to be more beholden to big banks because of where he is located geographically.
For me, this is not about ONE VOTE, it is about a series of votes, a pattern, if you will, of aquienscence and waffling around the issues. If I could jusify for myself, to use the Biden example again, his vote on the Bankruptcy bill as him standing firm for some consistent principle or philosophy, I might be inclines to give him a break — same way for others, but I do not see politicains standing on principle, being true to clearly stated convinctions in working for the best intersts of their contituents. What I see, is men and women interested in holding onto power, out-of-touch with the people they are supposed to represent, each with his or her personal agenda which mostly has nothing to do with improving MY daily life or that of my children.
I do not possess an inability to see that reasonable people can disagree, and you talk of intolerance, but you display no tolerance for my point of view. I either support democrats or I am the enemy — that is the height of intolerance, IMHO.
I not only tolerate your point of view, I agree with much of it. I invite people with your view to engage the battles that have a chance of winning the war. Join us, don’t leave us. How is that intolerence?
I want to know what I would be joining, and so far (again, as I siad, you are not the only person I pose these questions to), no one has given me a reason to join you — I appreciate the “get these fuckers out” as a reason, but it just doesn’t work for me any more. Been there, done that.
If you have a compelling reason other than that, I am all ears, honestly!
Actually, the Democrats aren’t saying “Join us, don’t leave us”. They’re saying “Join us, but don’t expect us to actually do anything for you. Pro-life 4 evah!”
nothing to talk about. Would you continue to talk with me and try to find common ground if I repeatedly told you that your support of the deomcratic party and their losing strategies were an implict endorsement of Bush, neo-cons, or the destruction of the country?? I am not your enemy. I just hold a different point of view. I do not see the democratic party as a viable alternative for MY VOTE.
If this makes me a Bush-supporter in your eyes, so be it.
I don’t view you as the enemy in any way, but I agree this discussion between you and I has run its course.
I know you are not an intentional Bush supporter, and never have said that you are. You seem like a good person with nothing but honorable intentions. But, like it or not, people who share your views are (unwittingly) one of the many root causes for why we have BushCo. in charge of this country. If Nader hadn’t run, after all, Al Gore would probably be President right now.
“don’t (you CAN’T!) leave us, we are the Way and the Word” (it is becoming as desperate as authoritarian religion) Democrats – their fall back is Nader?
Such appalling narrowness. Such inability for the party to look WITHIN. God forbid it analyse itself and thus change and grow…
I certainly NEVER voted for Nader and infact LOL my advice for the party, of which I was a member in good standing for more than 3 decades, was to destroy Nader in the 90s. It certainly was doable… they both know where each other’s bodies are buried…
LOL I suspect the intersection of the party and Nader is thru the Trial Lawyers. Something both entities would rather not be transparent on/about.
The party is increasingly mired in inertia and cowardice. Always planning for the run off from a Bush implosion but loathe to really go after him.
It is a real pity.
Above all else, ’00 was lost on the ground, before voting and especially after the vote…. Not being ready (Bush v Gore was ready to roll on their side, they ANTICIPATED the conundrum of the ’00 [tho they expected the reverse outcome, popular vote to R, EC to Gore] election and were prepared to fight down thru the electors). What R know about Democrats is they do not fight. Never. They store up powder. Gold stars for powder storage.
Danner, Adler, Hertzberg have all written extensively of ’00. Nader was nearly crab grass in the deal. Gore for goodness sakes SHOULD have won TN. But handy for the party to fixate on and drive voters away, rather than find ways to fold people in.
Tiresome.
They want us to stay with a party that continues to ignore, insult and betray us.
If we are just good, patient wives – they might CHANGE!. If we only kept the house cleaner and the dinner hotter… they’d do for us.
If we leave them… things might get worse so we should stay. Stay in the comfort zone of the KNOWN.
I say fuck it. Time to burn some beds.
I am sorry that feels like a slap in the face. Sometimes the truth stings.
i hope that is just youthful arrogance talking. If you’ve graduated UCLA already then it’s obnoxiousness.
I don’t ascribe the “with us or against us” view to the entire left. Just those who say the entire Democratic Party is a lost cause and the best way to “work” for change in this country is through a third party or by abandoning the entire Democratic Party. I am not asking ANYONE to go along with the centrist push, if there is such a thing. Neither is Obama, Kennedy, Boxer, etc. I don’t think most people are trying to push the party in either direction, they are focusing on getting the corrupt neo-con fascists out of power.
Oh honeychild, where does one start. The Dems are pathetic and in dreadful shape. Sorry you don’t feel that way but I must inform you that it is the American people who feel that way. Read a poll kiddo. The Dems poll just as bad as the Neo’s because they will not stand together and so the people see they are as corrupt as the party in power, sucking from the same corporate teat.
If only there were focusing on getting the corrupt Neo’s out of power. That’s the problem. Half of them are voting IN UNISON with them. Your naivete is amazing, followed only by your wrongheadedness.
Resorting to personal attacks now? Nice. I might as well go try to engage wingnuts on a right-wing blog.
So funny you said that Paul. My strategy was to act as a mirror and post in the same tone you did to see how you would reply.
Read your comments as if they were self-critiques! If you don’t like how you look in the mirror, then change.
Karl Rove would be proud of you.
I hope so, the people who defeat him are the people who will know just how to counter him.
Now Paul, this is 2 threads in a row of Madman’s you’ve tried to derail.
I’m on to you and your game. So is everyone else.
On to my game? What game is it that you think you (and apparently everyone else) is on to?
I took your bait and reviewed by comments. Can you please show me where I referred to my interlocutor(s) with terms like “naive,” “arrogant,” and “obnoxious”?
I see where I used things like “respect your views” and “agree with much of what you say.” My attempts are to bring people together to fight the truly bad guys, tolerant of our differences, not to divide us and allow the GOP to continue to enjoy its nearly unchecked power. The fact I get to endure your attacks for doing so just makes my point even stronger about how some on the left are no different than the wingnuts on the right.
oh paul….
it was this comment to Brinnainne that i was mirroring:
To ignore the only viable alternative is to implicitly endorse the pseudo-fascists. I am sorry that feels like a slap in the face. Sometimes the truth stings.
the arrogance of it. You don’t have to name call to do it, it was implicit in every word. Just gave you a taste of your own medicine. I see how much you like it when it’s implied to you.
oh i do see you sprinkle sugar with your strychnine, clever but transparent. you won’t be derailing these threads anymore without a good kleiglight shining on you.
Derailing the thread? The diary starts off about disenchantment with Democrats?
Go ahead and follow me around insulting me like a child if you must. “Transparent” indeed.
keep trying to light your own bonfire.
Following you around? Dude, you’re the Madman stalker. Again, just giving you a taste of your own medicine and how you don’t like it. Telling, very telling.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I wasn’t even aware who “Madman” was or that I had previously commented on a diary by him or her.
This is bizarre.
Yeah, so bizarre that one glance at your own “comment” link would verify it instantly.
not buying the innocent routine, peddle it elsewhere.
Now I’m being called a liar? Wow.
too lazy to click your own comment link? I’m sure it’s because then you see what everyone else will see, repeated thread trolling of someone you claim to have no knowledge of. What does that make you? Gee, i know i heard that term recently, now where did i just see that?
See here.
JUST STOP.
sorry brinnainne, the only way to stop thread trolling is to stand up to it.
Or, just for shits and giggles, ignore? Or, for even more giggles, engage in a non-hostile, non-combative way? Just sayin’ — there IS a higher ground!
i’ll bow to you, CabinGirl and Man Egee, mostly because it’s almost time to go get on a Manhattan Subway! Ah, NYC never a dull moment 🙂
And come back when you get home (or wherever it is that you’re off to!)
I bow right back at ya!
Not to butt in, but I’ve noticed that ignoring the orange kool-aid crowd usually makes them take their toys and go home pretty quick.
Okay, I will indeed leave with that remark. It may take me awhile, but I can tell where I am not welcome eventually.
but I’m noticing that you are pretty derogatory towards anyone who may have a history of voting Dem, but doesn’t have blinders on towards the party’s shortcomings. And they do have shortcomings.
I also like some of your comments, just not the ones where you are insulting people who aren’t blinded by the Blue…
threads like this tend to get heated because it is calling for a major change in the political landscape. I’m a Democrat, but I don’t consider myself 100% partisan. I think it’s important to hear exchanges between those that want to transform the Democratic party from within and those who are calling for a new movement. I’ve had to filter through some of the blather, but I’ve learned alot from both you, wilfred, Madman, everyone. I think if we all just stick to making our arguments without the accusations/name-calling, then we might end this day with someone learned. </humble sermon>
I agree completely with you manee….
Instead of third party? I see things that need changing, but I see a good way to change it by staying and working with the party.
Sorry, according to some that would make you a sellout and little, if any, different than those who support he GOP.
people who do not agree with you and support the democratic party to the GOP. No one else is doing that here.
I thought you have been saying all along there is little if any difference between Dems and Reps?
I am talking about professional politicians, you seem to be talking about individuals. Yes, in the grand scheme of elected officials and their inscestous relationships, I see little difference currently….again I ask you to please give me a compelling argument for “joining you” other than, “we are not quite as bad as the other guy”. I am honestly all ears!
We already went down that line, remember? I gave you specific examples, like Supreme Court nominees (e.g., Ginsberg vs. Miers, Breyer vs. Roberts), and you said the differences weren’t distinct enough for you.
I am sorry that you feel the way you do. I feel very strongly about what Bush/GOP is doing to this country, and very strongly that, although certainly nowhere near perfect, Democrats in power would be so much better.
I think we have made our respective positions clear and certainly you aren’t going to convince me that the best path for this country is for the far left to abandon the Democratic Party anymore than I am going to convince you that the Democratic Party is the path back to some resemblence of sanity in this country. So, let’s take leave of this argument, at least for now.
Yes, but you are talking in the past tense — what COULD have been, I don’t say that I disagree with the examples that you give, I just say that it doesn’t matter either way and want the question answered in the FUTURE tense…and there, I get no answer.
I wonder how the democrats think they are actually going to win anything — if there is no convincing someone like me, how in the world will you convince people more in the middle or right-leaning to come over to your side?
Do you believe that the losses the party is suffering from within will be supplemented from without? If so, why? If not, how will you win?
I am not trying to convince you of anything — I am just genuinely curious about how you would respond to these questions (understanding of course that you do not speak for anyone but you). But if you want to end the discussion, that’s fine too.
And what will your beloved Dems do to stop Miers?
… I’ll be waiting to see the difference you speak of.
Everyone works where they can be the most effective, and i trust you (and everyone else) to know exactly where that is — I would never call you a sell-out (contrary to what some may say about non-democrats), I would say MORE POWER TO YOU!
oh, indeed!Of course you can. I’m supporting my local Democrats, but I’m lucky enough to be represented primarily by progressives.
I think people should follow their hearts, their minds and their consciences and work for change in the best way they know how.
I firmly believe that an “open market” of competing ideas, of ferment and contested primaries and a vigorous give-and-take, we’ll build something new, something better, something removed from the old corrupt party that hangs around our necks like a maggot ridden albatross.
This is something I’ve been saying for some time. Democracy is not an entitlement. It’s a responsibility. And, the Thomas Jefferson quotes are fabulous. The man was a visionary. We the people have really become lazy and we’ve been helped along the way by an elite class that has no genuine love for democracy. An educated, informed populace is a constant threat to a “ruling class” and ours has convinced Americans that intellectualism is bad and that what oppresses them are other citizens of different race, religion, or sex. Keep us ignorant and fighting amongst ourselves and we can’t possibly be threat to their entrenched power.
it is to get involved; please excuse my language. I’ve been back into the New Orleans, and we photographed the Iberville and Lafitte Housing complexes, the last, affordable housing in downtown New Orleans. Many of the low-wage workers who scrub the toilets in the hotels and bus the tables while you eat, live there.
Iberville took no water, but Lafitte took about 3 to 5 inches of water. All of the buildings are structurally intact, including the roofs. Iberville was built by the New Deal, Lafitte not long after. We ran into an ex-resident of Iberville who said people used to go there to ride out storms, because the buildings are so strong.
I called HANO (housing authority of New Orleans) to find out when the residents would be allowed back in. They said they wouldn’t, because Lafitte and Iberville are “decimated”. I told them I have pictures to prove this isn’t so, and am prepared to go to the media with them.
They are in cohoots with the Feds and local powers that be to tear these complexes down for the real estate. We’ve got their number. WE NEED CITIZEN PARTICIPANTS AND OBSERVERS AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT. If you think you don’t make a difference, get involved and see what happens, and I’m not necessarily talking about writing a blog, although that is important also.
To decimate is to reduce by one tenth, so maybe they are decimated. That, however is no reason to condemn them. My point is that, in addition to being crooked, they’re butchering the English language.
Interesting change in the usage of that word: dec·i·mate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-mt)
tr.v. dec·i·mat·ed, dec·i·mat·ing, dec·i·mates
To destroy or kill a large part of (a group).
Usage Problem.
To inflict great destruction or damage on: The fawns decimated my rose bushes.
To reduce markedly in amount: a profligate heir who decimated his trust fund.
To select by lot and kill one in every ten of.
[Latin decimre, decimt-, to punish every tenth person, from decimus, tenth, from decem, ten. See dek in Indo-European Roots.]
deci·mation n.
Usage Note: Decimate originally referred to the killing of every tenth person, a punishment used in the Roman army for mutinous legions. Today this meaning is commonly extended to include the killing of any large proportion of a group. Sixty-six percent of the Usage Panel accepts this extension in the sentence The Jewish population of Germany was decimated by the war, even though it is common knowledge that the number of Jews killed was much greater than a tenth of the original population. However, when the meaning is further extended to include large-scale destruction other than killing, as in The supply of fresh produce was decimated by the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, only 26 percent of the Panel accepts the usage.
OH ((((Duranta))))))))!!! Keep witnessing!
I believe it. Because I no longer have any confidence in the “Free Press”. They are a bunch of propaganda whores.
I can scream and holler but others would call me a tin foilist… but I believe Bush Regime’s only plan was to ruin this country.
And the Democrats have stood by silent. We can no longer depend on anyone to be our eyes, ears and mouths. We are the HEART of this country. Time to take it back.
I wonder if those of us who complain the loudest about the Democratic Party have ever been to a local Democratic Party meeting or caucus. Even if we could not take control of our local party offices, we could make ourselves and our opinions known within the party structure.
The two-party system is very bad, but it is entrenched in the U.S. Third party candidates, historically, have destroyed the chances of the party they splinter from. Where does that leave us? What are the chances that my favorite, the Green Party, will rise to power in 2006 or 2008?
It is a horrible but realistic assessment in my opinion that we must choose between the two major parties. On one hand, we have a shell of a Democratic Party that still has members and elected officials who DO stand up for us (Boxer, Conyers, Dean, for example) and on the other hand, we have a Rethuglican party that is totally disgusting from top to bottom.
Concerned citizens do have the option of joining and influencing the Democratic Party from the roots upward. It is a difficult choice and a difficult task, but in my opinion it is necessary and also more likely to work than hoping for a third party to take over the country.
By all means, if you disagree with my analysis, feel free to work for and vote for a third party. I do and will continue to respect your work.
As for me, I will continue to work for and advocate taking the Democratic Party back from the DINOs. I continue to believe that if the Democratic Party were in control, we would not be at war in Iraq, we would not be torturing every person of Middle-Eastern origin that we can grab, our country would not be running up huge deficits, that the richest among us would be paying more of their fair share, and that the Bankruptcy bill would have never made it to the floor of the House or Senate.
I believe that the Democratic Party, while it may be a piss-poor opposition party, would be much better as the majority party than the Rethuglicans.
they are almost always scheduled here when I can’t go, conflicting w/ work or class, and at places where I would need a car to attend.
I am a citizen, and I DON’T have to be a party insider to demand representation. Entrenched parties will often schedule things so that it is most convenient for those already in power.
By all means, work w/in the party. I’m just saying that we’ll all be better off is everybody gets involved following the dictates of their consciences.
I agree that we are all better off if more of us real progressives get involved where we feel that we can do our best to take back our country.
It is true that one should not have to become a party insider to to be represented. I agree that many citizens will not have the time or even the inclination to become involved in the mechanics of activism. Every citizen can not necessarily be an effective candidate for office, not everyone can walk the neighborhoods and knock on doors, not everyone can find the time to attend a party gathering, whether Green, Democratic, or whatever.
The inconvenience involved in becoming active is not isolated to the entrenched parties. I have sacrificed many evenings when I would prefer to be at home this past year to participate in and lead a local citizens group. Many folks interested in the mission of this group cannot participate at the regular meeting time that the majority of the group has decided upon because of scheduling conflicts.
We do our best to include their views in our discussions, but it is still those that show up and do the work that make the biggest difference. If the individuals that don’t or can’t attend the meetings don’t participate by making phone calls to other members or sending emails to the leaders at their own convenience, their voices will not be heard during the policy-making discussions. This is simply a fact of how groups work.
If you call your local party (the party of your choice) offices and ask for a schedule of meetings ahead of time, you might be able to find a way to schedule your work times to be off during that time. As for classes, I sympathize with your problem there.
Also, if you would ask the local party offices if someone would pick you up on the way to the meeting, I bet you’d get a positive response.
In the end, it will be those among us who choose the inconvenience of finding a ride to a meeting, walking the neighborhoods and knocking on doors, or even becoming a candidate for office, who will have our viewpoint represented best.
to come home and find this thread hijacked by yet another camp follower of the powers-that-be. Young paul, enjoying the power of the skills he’s learned (as a communications student, IIRC), is employing all the skills of a flack, of a PR guy running a focus group. Trying to push buttons, drive a discussion in a certain direction.
There is more and more of this kind of “manufacturing of consent” going on in the liberal blogosphere. It depresses me every time I see it, and it precludes real discussion. It is a continuation of citizen-as-consumer, the model that the leaders of the two entrenched parties are so desperate to maintain.
I was so angry to come home and find this on a thread that had been so positive, especially after the thread on the crosspost at dkos had been so productive (except for the brief interjection by biminicat, but he’s not as well-schooled in sophistry as dear paul).
I doubt anybody will see this, but I needed to get it on the record.
I’ve been trying to gather my thoughts about this discussion and I don’t know if I’ve accomplished that yet. But I think its more than our friend paul. Lately these kinds of exchanges have become more common and at least from what I have seen, they usually happen around a discussion about dumping the Democratic party. I usually find myself agreeing philosophically with the person who gets identified as a “thread troll” and it is painful to read. I’d like to join in the discussion but don’t want to fight. It just seems that we have a hard time talking about this. Don’t know why.
There IS a rational argument to me made for sticking w/ the party (floridagal makes it above). The problem is that guys like paul, and many over at the Big Orange Place, demand that this is the ONLY way to be politically active.
There is something broken. When some of us point this out, and dare to question the entrenched powers, we’re attacked as traitors, or stupid, or naive, or “single issue voters”.
It’s hard to step outside the accepted groups. But how else can we ever have change unless somebody does that?
I welcome voices like yours, or at least I try to. We need to have these discussions, desperately.
I’d like to take another try at understanding this disucssion from my perspective. Though I doubt anyone will see it – its good for me to sort it out.
I think some of the problem is that we are generalizing too much. What does being active in a party mean to any one individual. Here’s what it means to me lately:
On a very local level, we just had a mayoral primary. I’m sorry I didn’t vote for the Green candidate instead of the D endorsed one. You can play with your vote sometimes in the primaries in a way that you can’t in the general election.
On a state level, I’m going to get involved in with Amy Klobuchur’s candidacy and hope that she wins the D endorsement – and eventually takes over Mark Daytons seat (not a bad progressive himself, but decided not to run again). I don’t currently know about any third party candidates in the race and if there was one – would probably get beaten by the R Kennedy if we as progressives supported them.
On a national election – we don’t even know who the presidential candidates will be. I know in the primaries I’d probably support Feingold if he runs. If Hillary is the general election candidate, then I might have some hard decisions to make (also depending on who the R is). Thats when this kind of discussion will become very real for me.
So you see, this is not an abstract discussion for me. It really depends on the situation you are talking about. And I think that might be true for others if we ever get more specific that a simple discussion of Democrats vs third parties. It is in this sense that I was agreeing with Paul’s statment that its not as simple as “all Democrats are wimps.” Its much more nuanced than that.
I see it. It’s not a case of “either or” for me. I support third party candidates on a local level when I can. On the national level I tend to be more cautious. In the primaries I vote for the candidate who best represents my point of view. In the last general election I voted for Kerry. I probably would have voted for him even if there were a strong third party candidate running, which there was not. The problem for me is that I see my vote for democrats being taken for granted and though I fear the consequences of abandoning them completely, I’m just about at the point where I believe that the democrats need to swallow some pretty nasty tasting medicine in order for them to wake up and realize that they really need to work a lot harder in the future if they want my vote, and that means speaking to me and my values. That doesn’t mean caving in to me. It means embracing me within the structure of the party, not casting me aside when my needs are inconvenient to them. I believe that the democrats continue to make a fatal mistake when they act as if they need to move to the center to grab the elusive swing voters. The republicans understand that their base is what wins them elections, though they are flirting with losing their base right now. The democrats have lost their identity precisely because they have alienated their base. It is no wonder that people like me are looking for different ways to feel represented again, and if that means that the country has to suffer more republican rule while a viable third party is built, then I’m just about there.
Thanks SS for continuing this discussion with me. I really think in most of the important ways the two of us agree. From my perspective, for the next three years, its all about working at the local and state level with any candidates you feel like you can support. I hope we get to try to have this discussion again here at the pond. But for now, I think I’ll just focus on enjoying all of the great photo diaries.
Madman says “get involved” and makes the sin of mentioning a third party?
paul says “stick with the Dems”?
Brin gets in there somehow…?
people get upset…
catnip is confused…
I don’t care what y’all do – just DO SOMETHING! Isn’t that the message of the diary?
exactly, thank you.
Oh…I got it? I didn’t want to read through all of the arguments. 🙂
I appreciate the discussion here Madman. Thanks for initiating it.
I think it’s a good thing we that we have this ongoing discussion now, as it is beginning to look like one hell of a row brewing for the next national D convention. Let’s hope it doesn’t end up like ’68/Chicago.
Obviously this discussion is going on outside of the blogoshpere. I bring up the main points of this diary every chance I get with local activists (from 25-75 yrs of age.)
I have yet to meet one who doesn’t think we need to shake things up at the DLC level of leadership and particularly many would like to see all of the old national campaign operatives/consultants put out to pasture.
I know former staffers of our ND delegation in DC, and many other life long die hard Democrats who have serious doubts as to the effectiveness of the present DLC-type leadership.
I’ve been active for some thirty-five years within the D party, and I’m fed up with things as they are. I’m fed up with failure, ’00,’02,’04,’06?’08?
If the leadership does not listen to input from the grassroots level and continues the past momentum, what possible chance is there for success, many of us wonder?
Talk of a Third Party is at this point in the category of brainstorming, but it is a required exercise, in light of the past failures, I’d warrant.
As the years go by if D party continues to lose viability then a Third Party will gain viability.
Those of us on the left need to continue to exert as much influence as possible on the D party in order to balance the heavy counterweight of corporate influence.