Using Technology to Deepen Democracy, Using Democracy to Ensure Technology Benefits Us All

Saturday, November 18, 2017

Fighting Democrat

Upgraded and adapted from an exchange in the Moot:
The Democratic Party is, to say the least, an imperfect instrument, but it is the only nationally viable available tool to fight Republicans in their now explicitly authoritarian formation... and even in more "normal" times it remains the best, if always inadequate, tool for progressive reform (pressed and made accountable from the left by activism not confined to partisan politics, of course, but still). As an anti-racist eco-feminist democratic socialist vegetarian secular-multicultural queer it is easy for me to sympathize with those who (presumably like you) find the glacially-paced inertially-incumbent continent-scaled politics of the Democratic Party coalition hopelessly inequitable and under-responsive as measured against my desired outcomes and critical positions. Oh, yes indeedy I do. But I am able to hold more than one thing in my head at the same time: And so, yes, partisan politics are inadequate but also necessary, and, yes, viable coalitions will always be much less radical in their politics than are the politics of the more radical and righteous members of their coalitions. But if you are fighting for prison abolition, universal income, environmental justice, sustainable accessible infrastructure, ending rape culture, and the queer subversion of patriarchy you will probably have to ally with Democrats for every substantial accomplishment and you will probably have to fight with many to most of those Democrats every inch of the way to make them see sense and conduct themselves with integrity. Just because Republicans are comic book villains now doesn't mean their opponents, the Democrats, are comic book heroes. Seeing the obvious differences between the parties hardly requires the pretense that Democrats are above suspicion or criticism. But at this point, false equivalency theses amount to fascist enablement. I don't think that sort of nonsense is the least bit intelligent, righteous, pragmatically useful, or provocative. So, yes, I will keep "harping" on the unqualified, bigoted, authoritarian incompetent asshole in the White House, thanks, and you can throw your bile darts at the first woman to be Speaker of the House, the most effective and one of the most progressive occupants of that position by any objective standard (which is hardly to pretend she is some paragon or to endorse her many incorrect and compromised positions), Nancy Pelosi, instead, and tell yourself that makes you the REAL sooper-revolutionary all the livelong day if you like. Thanks for the comment -- it is nice to see I still care enough about this sort of thing that you could actually get a rise out of me these days.

7 comments:

jimf said...

> [I]f you are fighting for prison abolition, universal income,
> environmental justice, sustainable accessible infrastructure,
> ending rape culture, and the queer subversion of patriarchy
> you will probably have to ally with Democrats for every substantial
> accomplishment and you will probably have to fight with many to most
> of those Democrats every inch of the way to make them see sense
> and conduct themselves with integrity. Just because Republicans are
> comic book villains now doesn't mean their opponents, the Democrats,
> are comic book heroes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/business/robert-reich-saving-capitalism.html
---------------
Robert Reich, a Multiplatform Gadfly, Comes to Netflix
By DAVID GELLES
NOV. 20, 2017

. . .

“Saving Capitalism,” which debuts on Netflix on Tuesday, is based
on his 2015 book of the same name. It is his second film,
and he has written 16 books, including “Supercapitalism” and
“Beyond Outrage.”

But where the French economist Thomas Piketty brings an
academic distance to his writing on inequality and
Senator Bernie Sanders channels a righteous indignation in
the political realm, Mr. Reich comes across as exactly what
he is — a frumpy, sometimes pedantic professor from the
University of California at Berkeley, eager to lecture anyone
who will listen about our broken financial world.

“The central thesis of the book and the movie is that the
game really is rigged,” he said. . .

[U]sing historical footage and animations, he explains what he
says has been the systematic takeover of the legislative process
by corporations and the wealthy.

Mr. Reich traces the origins of this effort to a paper that a
corporate lawyer named Lewis Powell, who would later serve on the
Supreme Court, wrote for the United States Chamber of Commerce
in 1971. Known as the Powell Memo, the document called on
big business and Wall Street to become more active in the
political process. . . [L]obbyists began flooding Washington,
and over the last 50 years, he said, many laws have been enacted
that favor corporations and the wealthy. . .

For Mr. Reich,. . . lawmakers are more often than not looking out
for the interests of corporations, not voters. “With great wealth
has also come great political power,” he said. “Wealth buys
everything from tax breaks, to bailouts, to subsidies, to laws
that on their face look to be neutral, but actually help particular
companies or industries or wealthy people.” . . .

Putting the genie back in the bottle won’t be easy. . .
Mr. Reich. . . comes prepared with a laundry list of progressive pipe dreams.
Get big money out of elections. Stop the revolving door between government
and industry groups. End gerrymandering of voting districts.
Raise the minimum wage.

Yet for any of these to happen, Democrats would have to start winning
more elections. . .

Not surprisingly, Republicans disagree with Mr. Reich on just about
everything. . .

“We are on the way to becoming a two-tiered society, composed of a
few winners, and a larger group of Americans left behind, whose anger
and whose disillusionment is easily manipulated,” he said.
“Once unbottled, mass resentment can poison the very fabric of society,
the moral integrity of a society, replacing ambition with envy,
replacing tolerance with hate.” . . .
====

I can hear the voice of Ayn Rand echoing from the beyond.

Cockroach! Contemptible mediocrity! Sanctioner of weaklings
and moochers!

The Mathmos said...

Quite right, but political realism regarding American duopoly doesn't negate the very real rift between the leadership and the base inside the Democratic Party. Read the book Shattered, read Norman Solomon's Autopsy of the party.

Just as the avowed fascists of the Tea Party managed to wrest control of their preferred political vehicle away from out-of-touch Republican blue-bloods, the DSA-backed, Bernie-inspired wing of the Democratic base must fight off the "moderating" influence of the neoliberal consultant class that has transformed what was once a Labor Party into a serially corrupt corporate trust-fund for rhetorically-challenged technocrats. We have seen the current batch of Democrats lose hundreds of seats during the Clintonite tenure, up to and including losing to Donald Fucking Trump. The DNC leadership must go, the Clintonites must go, the phony, electorally-bankrupt "centrism" must go. Nancy "We are capitalists" Pelosi must go.

There is no other available party for the left, on that we agree, but we have to change it if we are to change anything.

Dale Carrico said...

The Democratic Party is not nor will it ever be a revolutionary socialist party. I do not think such a party could be viable in the United States, even if its ideal desired outcomes would be my own. If your primary focus is opposition to Nancy Pelosi at a time like this I cannot take you very seriously or pretend you are a reliable ally. The Democratic party is already changing, the 2016 platform reflected progressive change, not that the fauxvolutionary wrecking crew and purity cabaret seemed to notice or care to build on that.

The Mathmos said...

The party still lost, though. Finding out why seems to me to be an urgent task for sane people everywhere. I submit that part of the answer is contained in the readings that I referenced earlier.

Of course, if you don't care to have your 3:02 PM paragraph the least bit challenged, there's a few pre-packaged canards floating around to maintain the privileges of the current leadership class.

"Russia hacked our election."
"Hillary won the popular vote."
"The whole of voting-age humanity is irredeemably racist, sexist, fascist."

Etc.

All the best,

Dale Carrico said...

Uh, "challenge" me all you want -- whatever that is supposed to mean. I'm certainly not going to fight with you. Good luck to you. Go do some good.

The Mathmos said...

You've twice shown a habit of deflecting what should be a political discussion with rather lousy insinuations about my person, so I certainly don't intend to keep you further.

But for the record I was merely suggesting that further readings about the 2016 election might challenge some of the assumptions informing your previous comment.

Regards,

Dale Carrico said...

Thanks, again, good luck to you. Do your best.