Tweet
It’s a common phrase you’ve heard before. "Insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting different results"
Yet despite us all knowing this, we’re about to do exactly that with Progressives in congress.
I’ll refer your attention to This letter that was so trumpeted here at FDL.
Over and over again we heard it, how the progressive caucus was finally showing backbone. They wouldn’t vote for any bill that didn’t meet our standards. The math was perfect, we finally had a voice.
Quite a bit of money was called for here to be donated to these progressives for keeping thier word.
Yet when push came to shove, what happened? Grijalva, the so called hero voted yes. They all voted yes except for Massa and Kucinich. Weiner dropped his amendment without getting a single thing in return, and cleared the way for the stupak amendment.
Let me say that I reject right out the assumption that he did it to help single payer. All it would do is make every single Democrat take an stance on this issue that is oh so important to thier base. It’s like making a republican take a stand on Abortion. It’s a core principle that now every Democrat would have to stand up and say "no I am against single payer", and that can only have terrified the leadership. And for Weiner, who is Chuck Schumer’s protege and has obvious ambitions of his own, he dare not defy leadership.
But already, I see the calls for us to redouble our efforts with the progressives. To try and get more money this time to make them keep thier word.
Friends, I humbly suggest that this is the definition of insane, that we are trying the same thing twice and expecting different results. As long as you will vote for the lesser of two evils (ask any Liberal how they’re going to vote), as long as the Democrats know you will give them your vote just because they’re not Republicans, is the longer nothing will change.
Nancy Pelosi, Obama, all of them can just brush aside our concerns because as they so like to say "we’re not going anywhere".
I say that we must not be insane. We must not try the same thing again. It’s time for something else.
I would suggest we ask Congressman Kucinich to leave the Democratic party. A party that no longer seems to support what we support. Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, just think about the impact if a few big name progressives left the Democratic party and formed a 3rd with Nader.
I Posit a world where the left no longer has to vote for "The lesser of two evils".
Yes I imagine it’s scary, 3rd parties are doomed to die. But imagine the result if it works. The far right crazy party, the centrist corporate Democrats, and this new truly Progressive party.
No longer beholden to Democratic leadership, free to truly vote thier conscience.
I put foward the motion that instead of just trying the same thing we did last time with Progressives and hoping for differing results.
This is in no way an inditement of Jane and what they did here at FDL. It was a motion we had to go thru, something we had to try. But I can’t see hwo the expect different results this time.
I say it’s time to step up the pressure. I say FDL shift focus from pressure on progressives to pressure for a new party.
23 Comments
I’m in agreement, except I say progressives should destroy (yes, destroy) the Democratic party and then rebuild it.
I’ve voted for Perot and Nader, but it’s clear third parties don’t stand a chance.
Third parties will never win in this country until we change our voting methods to IVR or range voting. So that would be where to start…
third parties don’t need to win in order to change the political landscape and see their policies implemented.
http://www.openleft.com/diary/15579/what-is-populism-part-ii
No doubt, no doubt.
While it’s absolutely true that third parties in America have had effects on politics and policies, it’s also true to say they and their movements have been relatively short-lived, especially compared to the mainstream parties and their ideas.
So, if folks want third parties to have more permanent significance, rules need to be changed.
i guess you didn’t actually read john emerson’s series because he mentions many things of long term significance achieved by third parties, populists and others working outside the D party and how critically important they have been to the good things the Ds have been able to accomplish.
Perot certainly affected things with his charts and his focus on deficits.
He was certainly correct about the giant sucking sound. But the MSM made sure he stayed on the margin.
Third parties historically may have caused Dems to do good. Corporate money today precludes that possibility, IMO.
Right, totally. Third parties have made a difference, definitely a big difference, even in our system, so I wouldn’t discount it. But not nearly the difference the main two parties have made. If you’re looking for that level, we need to change the rules. Which isn’t impossible, it’s just starting a bit smaller.
I think what Jason means is that no third party except one ever became significant enough to displace one of the two major Parties. That is, Jason’s definition of significance is being a winner, not just having long-term influence on legislation.
Of course, the two third parties that had very significant long-term influence, and that all contemporary Americans should be very grateful to were the Populists and the Progressives. The third party that became one of the two majors was the Republican Party, and they became dominant because the Whigs disintegrated due to sectional cleavages.
The prospects for a successful third party now are very good, because the Democrats have abandoned their historical purpose of representing the “have-nots,” and like the Republicans, are representing “the haves.” We need a “have-not” party. Some names might be “The New Progressive Party,” “The American Justice Party,” and “The New Deal Party.” Anybody else have some names handy?
Comment on something Inquisitr said:
Not with Nader. Nader is a deficit hawk and we don’t need any of those in the new party. Deficit hawks are vulnerable to Republican appeals to deficit neutrality. Anyone who joins the new Party has to know that the Party platform rejects the idea that budgets must always be balanced or that deficit neutrality should be any kind of standard for evaluating whether or not a bill ought to be passed. The right standard is whether a bill delivers positive overall value for American society, whether that entails a deficit or not.
thanks for the history and background. i agree about the need to challenge the deficit hawks (and maybe even the deficit doves who are ok with deficits only some of the time), but i sure wouldn’t mind seeing nader with some kind of consumer protection or corporate oversight position.
we definitely need a progressive economics policy platform – third party or not.
We know both parties are pure shit. What it will take to change that is not a third party, or changing people, it’s people changing. As long as a large percentage of the people support the two parties, those that don’t are the minority and have litterally no say.
Something needs to happen so bad that the people of all persuations wake up and want change. If that happens it may be the end, with no hope for a new beginning. As it stands there is little hope, and we who are willing to fight are in a losing battle.
My father had a saying about Mexicans in American politics Lobsters in a pot pulling each other down as soon as any of us tries to escape the pot. I hope Grijalva reads this post and remembers 2nd and 3rd generation Mexicans remember!
Aside from killing the women vote for any fool to vote for this and hurt the GOP who will all vote for this if this does not pass whats the result except to put a scarlet X on everyone who votes for this with Women voters?
This vote could be a trap for the GOP and Sarah remember she has a special needs child I assume that cost extra.
Agreed no cash until this is defeated I smell Rahm
The Lake is a Foul mouthed Fem Blog confession I’m male we are not going to support it and Grijalva, better remember None of the Oropeza’s will support it in fact he better start flyin right NOW!
Mexican girls give birth allot this won’t fly with his voters!
Fuck That we have the polls on our side we can take over the Dems!
Remember Nader
By the time a third party could be established, and get enough support to win elections and take over,”WE all will be dead. “
In a limited sense, sure, if folks were purely rational political beings.
but they are not, obviously. The Right is upfront about the role faith plays in their politics, most Leftists pretend that Reason is preeminent.
but really, Democratic Party apologists who like to claim to have Progressive principles such as Peace, Social Justice, Environmental issues choose to remain serfs on the estates of Democratic politicians no matter what indignities they are subjected to do so largely as a matter of Faith.
they utter their catechisms – “Nader!” “Cannot win – must not try!” “Might hurt the Democrats!” “Might elect a Republican!” “Reform from within!” but these are mere assertions of the devout, they need not be proven.
and, as many may know from trying to debate a Bush supporter, it is hard to debate Faith with Reason.
The futility of continuing to vote (D) no matter what is increasingly self-evident across the land. Simply build something new, and millions will flock to it, as nature abhors a (political) vacuum. The passionate, unrequited attachment to the Democratic faction of the ruling War Party is found in a rather small demographic segment – the youth have not been indoctrinated by the casuistry of voting for (lesser) evil to prevent evil.
If the teens I work with and live with are any indication, the youth are issue voters without a whole lot of regard for party. Now does seem to be the time to do something. The right is ready to bring down the establishment and entrenched politicians as well and the populace is actually on a progressive kick at the moment. I actually think it’s a good time to take over the D’s through primaries as well as a better time than most for a third party to get a foothold. There is a lot of dissatisfaction with the status quo and lack of government responsiveness to average people out there.
I no longer have any hope of anything changing. When I was born the top tax rate on the wealthy was 91%, now it’s around 36%. It is time for them to once again pay their fair share, yet if anyone mentions increasing taxes on the wealthy they are ostracized. We no longer have a democracy; we have an oligarchy. The wealthy and corporations control the whole damn thing, and people contiunue to vote against their own best interests. We are headed back toward feudalism at warp speed. Color me hopeless!
Independents can run and win if they are viewed as qualified and run competitive campaigns. IRV would be nice, but even with IRV, wing nut candidates lose.
The Democrats win as often as losing by the “artifacts of perversion” attendant to the winner take all, first past the post system, such as Clinton 1992 or NY-23 2009, so they’re not going to get into any rush to change that.
Locally in San Francisco, the Green Party has had a on-again, off-again relationship with the SF Democrat Party. But the Dems have a long term plan to coopt or repress Greens.
sporkovat:
Then why did Peter Camejo get fewer and fewer votes in each successive outing in California, even though in each successive election the voter pool increased?
Progressives need to realize that politics is like an iceberg, that the only reason why the top is visible is because there is a base which can support it by floating amidst the muck. Showing up with good ideas is insufficient. There has to be a campaign infrastructure that can compete precinct by precinct and do GOTV. There has to be some sort of credibility on the part of the candidate, having done some sort of successful public policy work. And there has to be a base of support that both keeps the elected honest as well as provides cover for the elected by pressuring their colleagues to support initiatives.
There are no short cuts.
I’m pretty tired of hearing how long change takes when the people who are encouraging us to support the Democrats because the alternative is sooo onerous are becoming another entrenched interest group feeding off the dysfunctional American political system.
Jane is an excellent model for how to get things done and I appreciate that she isn’t a true believer who thinks that just because someone has a (D) after her name s/he’s gonna be like Moses. The more we hear the politics is like an iceberg the more I realize we need a flamethrower instead of infinite patience. The slaves were fed Biblical passages to get them to accept their plight and the American worker has continually been told that there’s no use in unions or in organizing or in trusting government until we’re at the point we are now: Give money to a party that ignores our demands once it gets a majority yet continues to bailout every single corporate interest in the world EXCEPT auto makers because then union members would have been spared, God forbid!
I’m done with Democrats.
For all of Jane’s work, it seems like all that progressives have been able to accomplish is slightly lengthening the short end of the stick, a stick with which they have designs on our tuchuses.
I am not encouraging you to support the Democrats. I am relating a first hand experience of the most successful effort to construct a progressive independent party from whole cloth and what obstacles we faced even after we were certified with a ballot line and all.
I’ve not even got to the matter of what happens when the sectarian leftist pit vipers sense the heat of political energy being raised by independent progressives. COINTELPRO could not do a better job of short circuiting progressive energy than the few sectarian leftists still around whose dedication dwarfs their numbers.
Either future comers learn from our experience or they are going to make the same mistakes again.
Until you’ve worked on a winning independent campaign, you have no clue what it takes to win under the most favorable circumstances. We’ve beat Democrats, both corporate and liberal with dynamic, qualified Green candidates of all ethnicities and queernesses.
Showing up and insisting on how bad your opponents are and how good your ideas are don’t cut it. If it did, the world would be a better place. You’d be amazed at how what one thinks is a good policy path ends up being made better by having more eyes on the problem. I’m not talking corporate eyes, but the eyes of your neighbors whom you might not consider progressive at first blush.
Americans are too lazy to do the work it takes to build a third party, just like we’re too lazy to do what it takes to stop this pathetic insurance welfare bill that penalizes individuals, just like we are content to reap the fruits of brutal criminal wars to keep ourselves in comfort and convenience.