The Democratic Party, with its current cast of characters in charge, has refused time after time to stand up and fight for its underlying principles. Its recent incoherent or wimpy positions on the Iraq War, electoral fraud and the Alito nomination make clear that it's stuck in a self-destructive rut and isn't terribly eager (or can't figure out how) to climb out of it.
As I see it, we have two options in dealing with this deficient, bumbling, weak-kneed crew. 1) We get rid of them, work to take over the party from the grassroots up (similar to what the Republicans did after the Goldwater debacle of '64), and eventually bring some coherence and dynamic initiatives back into the party. Or, 2) We give up on the Democrats as an embarrassing joke, and begin thinking seriously about joining with others, similarly disenchanted with the political choices offerred, and found a viable third party.
There is another option: doing nothing, just continuing on as a rag-tag, undisciplined, weak OINO -- that's "Opposition In Name Only." But I think we all know that simply makes no sense. Being rolled regularly by the Republicans, or refusing to fight them in ways other than symbolic, gets old real fast.
OPTION#1: REFORMING FROM WITHIN
The first option, in a sense, is already happening. Folks like Paul Hackett in Ohio and Bernie Saunders in Vermont, both running for Senate, Diane Lawrence in a Florida Congressional district -- plus Cindy Sheehan thinking about a Senate race in California -- are willing to put themselves out there. Good people, good Democrats, willing to step out and step up in an effort to try to change the face of party, and American, politics.
So it's possible that many young, and not-so-young, activists from the Democratic base can start reforming from within -- starting at the precinct and municipal level, emerging from state legislatures, moving into statewide offices, taking the leap to running for Congress and so on.
That kind of activist movement, whether coordinated or run on the fly by individuals, takes a tremendous amount of energy, courage, money, and clear-headed planning. It may require a decade or so to even begin to see demonstrable results. Can the Democratic Party afford the luxury of the decade or more it might take? Can the country handle the amount of Bush-like corruption, authoritarianism, wars, torture, moral lassitude that will transpire during that period while the foundation is being laid for a new, re-energized Democratic Party?
Perhaps more important, will the big bucks (George Soros? Peter Lewis? show-biz wealth?) see what needs to be done and provide the required financing and political infrastructure building? When the conservatives got over their '64 humiliation, they didn't sulk; they started a decades-long campaign to take power by buying or creating media organs to get their message out, established think-tanks where policy and philosophies and strategies could be developed, created ways to get college-age youths involved in conservative politics.
EDUCATION COMES FROM EVERYWHERE
In short, they were dead-serious about changing the system that had locked them out for so long. Their big-buck magnates and foundations (Coors, Scaife, Olin, et al.) footed the bill. And, eventually, as we know, they wound up taking over the Congress, the White House, much of the media -- and now are in the process of locking up the Judiciary as well.
Am I suggesting that we imitate the rightwing tactics and strategies -- and smash-mouth politics -- that brought them to power? No way. But, while not abandoning our morality and principles, we have much to learn from that level of commitment and tenacity and patience.
Are we in the Democratic "base" ready to sign on, to sign up, for that level of work and the dedicated slog it will take? Or will we remain a base that energizes itself every four years and then wonders why we keep getting blind-sided by an organization (Rove Inc.) that thinks, breathes, acts politics every waking second? Take your pick.
I think it's not necessarily too late to make the attempt to reform the party from within. But it is late, and it will require a humongous amount of toil, sweat, and lots of tears to turn this supertanker around and then bring this party back to speed and coherence and courage. We must first make the Democrats into a true party of opposition, and then convince the American people that it's capable of governing.
(We're talking about elections here, which means that the Democratic Party is going to have to step out and point out forthrightly that our current voting system is a corrupted mess. It outsources ballot-counting to private corporations with secret software easily open to manipulation from the companies that own the e-voting machines and vote-counting computers, or to hacking from without. Those corporations are Republican-supporters at present, and key recent elections probably were fiddled with, according to scholars and other experts who have examined the shoddy system. If we can't overhaul the current manner of voting and ballot-counting, taking corruption and partisanship out of it, it won't matter how clean and transparent and dynamic our refurbished party is. We'll still contine to "lose," even when we win.)
OPTION#2: REFORMING FROM WITHOUT
I can't tell you how many liberal friends have expressed the same thought to me in recent months, in variations of these words: The Democratic Party is, and probably will continue to be, an embarrassing disaster, and it's time to at least start thinking tentatively about political life without it. That is, a viable third party.
Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in California and Washington, worked for two decades as a writer-editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org).
Mr. Weiner has done a fine job of exposing the dillemma we progressives face. The point he touches on, but which will likely drive this situation more than we appreciate, is "the warp speed of change" going on politically and culturally right now.
If we continue our vigorous efforts to impact the mainstream public and corporate media, the approach on which choice should become ever more clear, based on the success of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
by
Jim Prues (15 articles, 33 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 77 comments)
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 12:04:53 PM
Nowhere in the Constitution does it mention a political party. The Republicans are at the top right now, but their future is very uncertain. Bush could be impeached. Abramhoff could put the finger on a whole lot of Republicans and the anti-war movement is strong and getting stronger. I think we should further solidify the progressive agenda and many progressive groups are getting together on issues. We are faced with fascism here in the United States and we must take up the only tool that has ever defeated them, The United Front.
Cindy Sheehan is thinking about running against Dianne Feinstein here in California. This campaign could let the public know that Feinstein was a hawk on the war and that her husband Blum the mountain climber just got a 400 million dollar contract from the Carlyle Group. Joe Leiberman also has money invested in the war business and like Abramhoff both are enamored with Zionism.
We are doing fine, lets spend our energy in getting Democratic progressives elected this year.
by
gramps (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 107 comments)
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 3:33:14 PM
Dont' get crazy. A new party wouldn't have a chance. That would be playing right into the hands of the Rethuglians. The plans to run good Dems against the spineless is already rolling and is the best bet against these ruthless, corrupt politicians.
Oh, and somebody needs to tell Cindy Sheehan, she's had her fifteen minutes of fame. Now start working with the party, or get out of the way. Overall, liberals are getting very disenchanted with her antics. Read the blogs!
by
terri Kionka (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 83 comments)
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 5:39:26 PM
Get rid of the Demorlizingcrate party. They are all republicans in my view anyway. You plan to reform the Republican party's sidekick? They are liars along with the Republicans. Likewise trying to get rid of the Republican party too.
These two parties are nothing but scandal riddle organizations. Year upon year upon year of scandal going back to Truman and before.
They never get it right. We are constantly in debt, fighting lying wars, build lying walls in memory of victims. Toast and cheer one day the next slamming people into coffins.
How much insanity does it take to realize it is like trying to make the Titantic operate as a submarine that can fly as a supersonic concorde. It is just a useless effort .
These parties ingrained with each other are criminals who now have control of the legal process in America. In fact there is no legal rights for people in America anymore. Criminals kill criminals. That is the lot of the American fabric.
Crime never goes down, it is promoted to keep Prison jobs and cop jobs on the street. We pay truckload upon truckload of American tax money for these security dogs to watch and do nothing. They are as much a drain on society which is pulling us into more and more trouble.
It is the weak protecting the strong. People work all their lives to hand over their cash to Police to protect them from crooks? It is estimated that the Cops take more from innocent people than the so called disenfranchised who may steal a minute fraction of the amount so called security provides.
They parade around with guns and sunglasses, the majority of the time; suck up our hard earned days work and they give us nothing. This is Bush, the Guy who bombs poor people in Afghanistan. Bombs people without really knowing what they are shooting at. To say hey we are protecting you the American people!
Such a crock of dispicable nonsense from this outlandish moron people call the President of the United States.
Not only that but they are increasing the military to have more guys standing around, to wage war and steal other peoples country. They wonder why there is no democracy? There is no democracy in the USA. Americanism is who can get away with crime. Whoever can is the leader in the corrupt system.
We now have Alito as a Supreme Court Judge. Did I have a say in his position. Hell no.. This is democracy! Did Bush promote the idea of a woman to the bench? No he made fun of them by trying to appoint an unqualified one. If anyone should make decisions about abortion it should be the woman in leadership roles. Instead we have witnessed another example of denying realness in a supposed democracy.
This country called America is really dogshit, after all thats all Americans do in their spare time is to go walk their dog to watch them take a .........
We need new parties, and means to doing things right. We need to correct the constitution, return lands to Native Americans, give honor to both Native and Black Americans, support antiwar decisions, and realize not fighting has more honor.
If we don't win.........well so whats new? Ask yourself the question? Better to win and be wrong or lose and be right? Presently I think losing to be right has more to being a winner, than the Bush and Demoralizingcrates have been supporting us with the past 230 years......of dog...t
by
Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments)
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 7:19:05 PM
I'm afraid we'll need a revolution for democracy in this country.
Reforming the Democrats is futile given the structual realities of modern two-party politics which is based on money, power, public opinion and propaganda.
More and more conservatives are realizing that the "refurbished GOP" is only giving lip service to their values - and they're right. I'm afraid the "refurbished democrats" would suffer the same fate.
And remember their will not be a Democratic majority forever.
Check out my essay Strengthing America and its People:
You're bit, A TRUE PARTY, NOT AN EGO-RUN, is absolutely rediculous.
1. Look at the statistics, following Nader's candidacy, the Green party experienced phenominal growth.
2. Nader kicked Cobbs ass in 2004.
3. Apparently the Greens have their flaws as far as party building is concerned because of this. It was in their best interest to nominate Nader and buck the safe-state nonsense.
4. What youre upset about: "refused time after time to stand up and fight for its underlying principles", is what you apparently wish the Green party to practice.
Time to join forces with people of all political persuasions and fix our democracy. Know you're enemies. Liberalism is dead. Fight the two-party system.
Thanks.
by
Dom Jermano (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 40 diaries, 930 comments)
on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 at 5:11:22 PM
I'm afraid we'll need a revolution for democracy in this country.
Reforming the Democrats is futile given the structual realities of modern two-party politics which is based on money, power, public opinion and propaganda.
More and more conservatives are realizing that the 'refurbished GOP' is only giving lip service to their values - and they're right. I'm afraid the 'refurbished democrats' would suffer the same fate.
And remember their will not be a Democratic majority forever.
Check out my essay Strengthing America and its People:
You're bit, A TRUE PARTY, NOT AN EGO-RUN, is absolutely rediculous.
1. Look at the statistics, following Nader's candidacy, the Green party experienced phenominal growth.
2. Nader kicked Cobbs ass in 2004.
3. Apparently the Greens have their flaws as far as party building is concerned because of this. It was in their best interest to nominate Nader and buck the safe-state nonsense.
4. What youre upset about: 'refused time after time to stand up and fight for its underlying principles', is what you apparently wish the Green party to practice.
Time to join forces with people of all political persuasions and fix our democracy. Know you're enemies. Liberalism is dead. Fight the two-party system.
Thanks.
by
Joseph Schroeder (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 at 5:53:25 PM
I remember being very disturbed during the 2000 election when the progress of a candidate was measured in how much money they had in their "war chest".
Unfortunatly, I see a Catch 22 where in order to get the corporations out of the campaigns we need to elect those who are not beholden to the corporations.
If that can happen through the Democratic party, well fine, but we may be reduced to holding bake sales for the candidates who will carry the grassroots message to Congress.
by
Louisa Beal (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 3 comments)
on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 at 11:39:40 PM
9 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
