he great struggle between the left and the center for control of the Democratic Party went another round on Tuesday. Several prominent Bernie Sanders-style Democrats, like Abdul El-Sayed in the gubernatorial race in Michigan, and Brent Welder in the primary for Kansas' 3rd Congressional District, went down to defeat, despite receiving a lot of assistance from Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
I assume this guy is notorious for other actions as well? I tried to follow the Michael Brown incident and just reviewed the Wikipedia page. I had to conclude it was the wrong case for the left to get so strongly behind - it is quite muddled and a decision not to prosecute Wilson looks reasonable. There are many other cases of police shootings that are completely unambiguous and I support the idea of police reform in multiple directions (body cameras, training, rule changes …), but I can never come on board this whole hands up don’t shoot simplification of this story.
Congrats to all the progressives that won including this new prosecutor (I don’t disagree that we need better prosecutors too - the most recent John Oliver piece was infuriating).
I hadn’t heard about this before, but I look forward to reading the piece linked. I suppose the right will argue that this is a return to the projects, but I would consider it one of many possible economic activities that we should consider moving to the public sector (banking, health insurance obviously, internet, utilities, I’d even be up for retail options).
When America finally realizes that “the left” in many (most) of its iterations has been demonized by the right, forces of greed, usury, endless war, corporate fascism, corruption, and treasonous subversion of America - that “the left” encompasses those “American” values past presidents of both parties once espoused and American’s believe-in, they will support what is called “the left” and their, OUR issues for the Common Good, not common greed!
The demonized “left” includes FDR and Eleanor, Dwight Eisenhower, jack & Bobby, Martin & Malcolm & Rosa, and other hero’s of the past, like Eugene Debbs, IF Stone, the Wobblies, trade unionists fighting the bosses for workers rights, women’s issues & suffrage, our priceless environment, clean air and water, …peace…and a civilian society, not a military dominated MICC America…all encompass “The Left”!.
The term “the left” is designed to pull the wool over the eyes of American’s by right-wing neo-fascist saboteurs, complicit pundits, the MSM talking (dung) heads, white supremacist racists, and that today;s “left” used to be the “center” (or soft-right) before the R’Cons went completely off the rails and DINO Dem corporate big-money sellouts (read the Clinton/Obama camps) followed them to serve the power behind the duopoly grand-Con politicians, to their everlasting shame…(except they have none)
“The left” serves the people…the 99% and a sustainable environment, civil and human rights, publlc education., universal not-for-profit single payer, and restoration of fair progressive taxation of the ultra wealthy and corporate pirates…all the sectors that have preyed on the public like the Robber Barons including the MICC war-machine robbery Eisenhower warned our nation against…boy, howdy was he right…in spades!
When the media and journalists use the term “the left” it’s infuriating…especially NPR and other so-called public entities that buy the narrative of the right, vast wealth, the war-machine and corporate/banker/wall street power propaganda!
This is the second article today which touts the Sanders bill while totally ignoring H.R. 676—WTF??
It seems to me that the center left strongly supports many so-called “socialist” programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the food stamp program, subsidized housing for low income people, and subsided public colleges and universities. The main difference between the center left and the left with regard to Democratic politics centers on winning elections. There are two ways to win. One is often referred to a triangulation, where you kind find a compromise between one side and the center, and the other is divide and conquer where you go strongly to one side and hope to get the majority. Both strategies can be effective. So the argument is over which strategy is the best in a general election in this political climate. To win primaries it is often better to go toward the left because the Democrats who show up for primaries tend to be in general to the left of all Democrats and certainly to the left of independents. But happens in the general election when votes from independents are needed to defeat the Republicans. This is where things get intresting.
The function of the Democratic party is to neutralize leftish tendencies in voters through many & various means, the most common of which is to propose left-sounding ideas like Obamacare which in reality function as thinly disguised oligarchic capitalism. Alternatively, the party demonizes the left, and promotes scary boogie-men (real or imaginary)like Russians, white supremacists, and ‘Islamic extremists’ to enforce discipline.
With the possible exception of the New Deal years, and the 1972 McGovern ticket, the Democratic Party has effectively suppressed every major left-leaning impulse in America.
It’s irrational to expect anyone working within the party to suddenly succeed with any sort of genuinely socialistic program.
Progressives seeing hope in the Democratic Party are Charlie Brown, running up to kick Lucy’s football once again.
Seems to me, the Left got up and left when 45 entered the White House.
I remain an optimist.
.6% or 1215 votes in the Ohio 12th Congressional Special Election. You’ve got your work cut out for you. Good luck and here’s a tip o’ the cap, to ya’.
I didn’t see anything in the article that touted Sanders bill over HR 676. It did mention endorsements by potential 2020 presidential candidates - but that group are all Senators so Bernie’s bill would be the only one that could co-sponsor on this topic.
From the article:
" Practically every probable 2020 contender has signed on to Sanders’ Medicare-for-all bill."
H.R. 676 has been introduced by Rep. John Conyers in each session of Congress since dirt was invented, and yet rates not a mention. But the brand-new and clearly inferior Sanders bill, introduced for the first time this year, is grabbing all the headlines. It reeks of Democrat bait-and-switch.
While I don’t agree about this article - where they were specifically mentioning the opportunism of the 2020 candidates - I did notice that in the other article today.
Considering how many representatives have signed on to co-sponsor HR676 - it really does need to get more attention from the progressive press.
There seem to be more minorities on the left than on the right. People are people regardless of their race. But don’t rich minorities tend to be conservatives on the right, like rich white people? In which case wouldn’t prejudice be more a matter of having money than a matter of racism?
There’s no rule on racism. There are very rich people that are deeply racist and poor people that are very racist. Often, progressives like to think that a more equitable economic system will mitigate this. Sadly, if history is any guide, there are too many exceptions to this hypothesis to make it a rule.
To paraphrase Eugene Debs, better to vote for what you want & not get it, than to vote for what you don’t want & then actually get it.
Or in my own words: With the Democrats, even when they win, you still lose.
Maybe so, although the rich of all races seem to look down on all poor people, including those of their own race.
According to you and some guy that’s been dead since before The New Deal.
Can’t you find someone who can still fog a mirror to point to for your inspiring comments? Just wonderin’
You had to see this coming, I kind of figured it when they had Sanders roll a different version than H.B. 676.
::posted to wrong place, sorry::
The left started long ago and will not leave us before the poor and the underclassed.
A political party has in some small part begun to embrace the left. The central party has not. Some of its voters have.
But the question that remains is not whether the left will continue, but to what extent the movement of the Democrats towards the left is an embrace, and to what extent it is a stranglehold.
We have yet to see whether these Democratic Socialists can stand apart from the Democratic Party and particularly the Democratic right, whom Cooper addresses as “centrists.” Since these are not particularly centered to anything except the party machine, I suspect that we do not have long to wait for some indications.