Home | About | Donate

The Liberty Bell and the Democratic Party: A Tale of Two Fractures in Philadelphia


The Liberty Bell and the Democratic Party: A Tale of Two Fractures in Philadelphia

Amy Goodman, Denis Moynihan

PHILADELPHIA—The Liberty Bell, on permanent display here at Philadelphia’s Independence Mall, is known for its famous fracture. The bell was cast in London in 1751, and cracked on its first test ring. The bell was molten down and recast in Philadelphia, and rang from the Pennsylvania State House, now known as Independence Hall, for close to 100 years. A second crack formed years later, and the bell eventually was decommissioned, taking on the symbolic significance it has today, inspiring movements to abolish slavery, for women’s suffrage and others.


Historic indeed. Just as Obama's nomination and presidency are historic. So historic, in fact, that the status quo, the reign of big money, goes on unabated. Steeped in hubris and piles of cash, neither party represents the people of this country. WE can safely be ignored. History, as ever chronicling the mundane, riches-soaked march of evil, impassively notes the passing of the torch to candidates who are either insane or simply venal to the core. So, let's not count our chickens before the eggs have hatched. In fact, the people of this country have neither eggs nor chickens. Why bother to expect anything different because a corrupt woman ascends to the presidency instead of a corrupt man?

Sanders promised at the beginning of his campaign that if he failed to win the nomination he would support the democratic candidate. In keeping his word he has failed to gauge the measure of his success. Had he joined with Jill Stein, given that at this point in our history WE are fed up with being living, breathing zeroes to both major parties, Sanders could have handily beaten both the pompous pompadour and the venal queen of cash. Oh well, upon such miscalculations are made the sufferings of billions. Historic indeed, and not much different from the past.


I completely agree that replacing every corporatist leader in in congress and the senate would take too much time. Protesting is fine but a few hundred or even several thousand people protesting has often been too easily ignored. There was chaos and protests in the streets outside of the DNC convention for example, but it was impossible to know that by watching any of the television coverage. The only peaceable way to get the attention of our corporate owned government is through mass disobedience. If the 99 % could use the only real power we have and find a way to stage a nation-wide strike, no going to work, no purchasing goods, no cooperation in keeping the "system" moving, things would turn around very quickly.


Jill Stein would be the first 1) female, 2) Jewish, 3) physician and 4) Green Party President, far more historic than Clinton would be.


I am so naive... I say that because I am genuinely shocked that Amy Goodman, for all her faults in some areas, would actually advocate people cast their vote for Mrs Clinton. Ditto with Glenn Greenwald, who seemingly is implying the same in his recent interview. We have so few truly left progressives that this betrayal seems so painful. Clearly their thinking is as narrow and without a future vision as Clinton herself.


The answer to your question Amy is a resounding NO. All week the DNC shamelessly courted "disaffected" Republicans and continued to spit in the faces of progressive Democrats. They have made their choice, that they believe they can win without the progressives, and so continue their subservience to the oligarchy.

It may seem an indefensible position, but I openly admit that I am one of those that would see the whole rotten system collapses in November, with no real idea of what comes after, rather than continue the status quo.


The 99% have the same kind of power as the wealthy -- money. While we may not have as much individually, there are LOTS more of US. What we lack is organization. What people like Richard Viguerie accomplished, a grassroots mass mail fundraising effort for right wing causes, took years to realize. The internet would make the process of funding, say, a superPAC, much quicker. What I propose is a cooperative effort across all progressive organizations with an online presence to reach out to their members to give money for the purpose of ridding Washington of republicans and corporate democrats. Fight fire with fire. Fund progressive candidates up and down the ticket with gobs of cash. I optimistically hypothesized that we could convince 100 million Americans to donate $10 a month. Like I said, optimistic. But with the internet, why stop at asking only Americans to give. I'm sure there are people all over the world who are as sick of the creatures who currently inhabit Washington as we are, and who would be willing to donate as well. The averaged equivalent of 100 million worldwide at $10 a month is one billion dollars a month. If money is speech, let the 99% speak, not as fractured individuals, but as a money-gathering machine not only to get progressives elected, but to bribe the current crop of crooks with as much cash as it takes to buy them away from whoever owns them now. A billion a month may or may not be enough given the extent of the corruption, but if we cannot yet vote in progressive policy, we can purchase it. The system of graft is already in place, all it needs is some new cash in the game from the 99%. There's a new big cheese in town, and it is US.