Skip to main content

View Diary: Invitation To Respectful And Honest Discussion Between Party Loyalists And Progressives (58 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The first piece of advice is to count to 10 before (6+ / 0-)

    commenting here.  

    Commenting in anger is BAD.  Yes, I'm being judgmental.  But one must take the moment to de-rage, so that one doesn't make accusations of troll/shill/etc. that are never useful.  Rox/Sux is pretty much this failure on a rolling basis.

    It's the Internet.  We haven't evolved a talent over a hundred years to communicate effectively on it.  At the moment, am I speaking, or just writing?  It's a mix.  

    Departing from the level of site/Net meta, we all ought to be on the same side.  But there is so much information to which we don't all have the same access.  We're each unique bundles of info/experience, even if much of those are widely shared.  I would prefer that the Venn diagram of progs & Dems be 90%+ overlap, right?  That's a goal; move the Dems left.  We need as much cooperation between each other as possible.

    So, the real world conflict comes into play here, and this is one I don't see ending: the perception among the centrist Dems that moving left is BAD.  I think this perception is based primarily on bad data created by the cons solely for this purpose.  

    I've often commented on the site that my metaphor for the relational dynamic of our two party system is that of abusive husband & abused wife.  Everything he does is to control her, manipulate her; she falsely believes he loves her because of how charming he was long ago.  Those days are gone; he needs to go to prison, but she won't call the cops, because she can't envision a different life.  She tells herself this is the way it must be, & that it's her responsibility to accommodate him to stop the hitting.

    I think it's to their across-the-board detriment that the Dems moved right during the Clinton/DLC years...  but that is now the world we live in.  To the loyalists, I must insist that we work on moving back left, but I realize that so much destruction has occured that this is a monumental task, with the primary obstacle being the right-moving nature of current campaign finance.  

    That's the calculation Clinton made; he was forced to work in a corrupt system to whom he owed his position.  I hold Clinton responsible for his decisions, but I don't necessarily blame him, because what choice did he really think he had?  The tide had already turned, & no one really reported it, & the public wasn't paying attention because the Cold War was over & now we all had credit cards, yay!

    We must all be both realists AND idealists.  We have to accept that winning a socially red district may mean swallowing an anti-choice candidate, but if that candidate is an anti-Wall Street economic progressive, then let's go all in & win.  Let's prove that social cons can often be economic progressives, because it's TRUE.  

    Let's also embrace primaries, instead of wringing our hands about being mean or impolite or acting like Republicans.  Primaries are legit expressions of democracy, & even if Obama himself favors an establishment Dem in a primary, let the voters tell him No Thanks if they desire.  

    Please: don't EVER help campaign for an incumbent against a more progressive primary challenger that has a real chance.  Just. Don't.  Let's not pre-emptively give up on candidates that don't have money at the beginning if they can demonstrate strong grassroots support.  That assumption is the self-destructive expression of that abused-wife mentality that says We Have To Do What They Say Or Else Pain.

    It should be clear that I fall more toward the Progressive side; I'm a Loyalist only in that I work for Dems against the GOP consistently.  But I keep the big picture in mind.  I want a voting system that will allow multiple parties to compete on an even footing--IRV, Condorcet, Range, whatever works best.  I have no permallegiance to the Dems, & neither should you; they are just the better option, the pragmatic necessity of the times.  If you reject all Idealism, you cannot hope to envision the better world you ostensibly wish to help bring about.  You cannot entrust that vision to the speeches of our electeds; you & I must join to impose that upon them until they cannot resist it.  

    That's how this game is played.

    It's time to start letting sleeping dinosaurs lie, lest we join them in extinction by our consumption of them.

    by Leftcandid on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:18:31 AM PDT

    •  I agree 100% with this: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador, RockyMtnLib
      I have no permallegiance to the Dems, & neither should you; they are just the better option, the pragmatic necessity of the times.

      Well said.

      You cannot cross the sea merely by standing and staring at the water. Rabindranath Tagore

      by Thomasina on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 07:30:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  left you have this way of (0+ / 0-)

      spelling out your values clearly while at the same time trying to bring people together. I see this often on here and in person.

      I too am one who sees the need to move the Democratic Party, and, hopefully following, the American Overton Window leftward. I also share your desire to work in the party to keep Rs out of office.

      As for supporting one who is progressive economically but hold some odious social views, if I remember correctly Mark Hatfield - a Republican believe it or not, kind of fit that bill. He was staunchly anti-abortion but championed civil rights for all and was no New Deal basher. The late columnist Nat Hentoff was another.

      What I'm interested in knowing is this: what, in your mind, would be the political equivalent of us calling the cops on the abusive spouse?

      liberal bias = failure to validate or sufficiently flatter the conservative narrative on any given subject

      by RockyMtnLib on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:55:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site