Democratic (Party) Direction

Yeah lots of people are swayed by the romanticism of revolution.

at least it would allow them to kill their enemies, which has a certain appeal until you see it in action

I don’t know if anyone has noticed but it’s literally the end of the world. incrementalism is monstrous and omnicidal

Some people disagree with that and you have to contend with them.

it’s literally the end of the world. incrementalism is monstrous and omnicidal

without a plan of action, that perspective is just despair and defeatism.

if you apply Aimless' understanding of politics to the current situation in the Democratic Party, it makes the argument that the progressive side is doing very well and that it should continue it's course.

If the "progressive side" "doing very well" is Biden/Schumer/Pelosi then one would hate to see what doing very poorly looks like.

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party has negligible influence over the Biden Administration ("seat at the table" lololol) and policy, the legislative and executive party remains well to the right of what the party's voters believe in and desire. (cf. eephus, Warren, "moderate" above).

School marming that ya gotta vote 'em out isn't objectionable so much as "no shit." It's also irrelevant to talking about what the gerontocracy gets wrong and does wrong.

one would hate to see what doing very poorly looks like

where have you been for the past four years?

the legislative and executive party remains well to the right of what the party's voters believe in and desire

it occurs to me that, terrifying though this is, the legislative and executive apparatus of the GOP is probably about equally to the left of what the party's voters believe in and desire

It's also irrelevant to talking about what the gerontocracy gets wrong and does wrong.

This is your idea of what isn't "no shit"? The major satisfaction in that is that one gets to be the person who is right, over and over again. Identifying the problem is just the first step to a solution. You get stuck at that step.

If the "progressive side" "doing very well" is Biden/Schumer/Pelosi then one would hate to see what doing very poorly looks like.

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party has negligible influence over the Biden Administration ("seat at the table" lololol) and policy, the legislative and executive party remains well to the right of what the party's voters believe in and desire. (cf. eephus, Warren, "moderate" above).

School marming that ya gotta vote 'em out isn't objectionable so much as "no shit." It's also irrelevant to talking about what the gerontocracy gets wrong and does wrong.

Considering that ten years ago, the general population believed Obama to be the beacon of progressivism, I would say that the past few years have been wildly successful for progressives.

for actual progressives, I must clarify.

the GOP apparatus is economically to the right of its voters and socially to the left (by a hair - most of 'em seem to believe the own the libs shit as much as any dumbass in a MAGA hat)

Anyway, as the resident Warren stan, I would say that the Obama administration actually did, with her help, bring into being the CFPB, something which is very much Liz's Jam and which is Actually Good (you can tell because the Trump administration did everything they could to annihilate it) and I'm not convinced the Biden administration is going to be more hostile to her policy priorities than Obama's was. I take Biden's implicit promise to deliver something along the lines of "Obama III" to be sincere, in both the good ways and the bad.

The major satisfaction in that is that one gets to be the person who is right, over and over again. Identifying the problem is just the first step to a solution. You get stuck at that step.

Tapping the sign that reads "This is ilxor.com, a place where people have posted pictures of their penis and develop eternal distaste for others based on disagreements about Britpop."

* as "a" resident Warren stan, sorry, I know there's a lot of us on here

Hi!

Considering that ten years ago, the general population believed Obama to be the beacon of progressivism, I would say that the past few years have been wildly successful for progressives.

The general population still believes that. (See pretty much any 2020 political thread here, for the love of god.)

Two things can be true: the progressive wing has won a few seats, taken slightly more control of the 'public conversation' and perhaps shifted the vaunted Overton Window (though this would have as much to do with general immiseration - normal people across the political spectrum seem to recognize that wages for the bottom quarter of society are unsustainable, cross-reference Florida results between a minimum wage increase and political races); the progressive wing has also been soundly defeated at the highest levels of power and policy making, where the centrists and consultants/donors continue to rule for the foreseeable future.

Not saying that the progressives are in power, just that they've never been so close, and that it is cause for encouragement. The roadmap is there.

There's a central idea among progressives, one I'm deeply unsure of, is that on average the democratic party is to the right of their constituents. If it is the case, I would trust people to actually cement progressive power over the next few election cycles.

- one would hate to see what doing very poorly looks like

where have you been for the past four years?

Young progressives have entered and/or made great gains within the Democratic Party during the last four years. The concern is them being aggressively stymied and shut out this week, next month, and for the next two years.

AOC, presently the USA’s most famous progressive elected official, recently disclosed that she was sufficiently discouraged by life in congress to consider not running for re-election and moving to the woods. The blame for this lies squarely on the gerontocracy.

They’ll never not face opposition it’s called politics.

It’s when it’s from your “own” “party” that it’s discouraging tho is the thing.

Not saying that the progressives are in power, just that they've never been so close, and that it is cause for encouragement. The roadmap is there.

Until the mid '70s, it was a mainstream Democratic position to talk about abolishing the CIA, single-payer healthcare, broad social democratic welfare policies, increasing regulation in major areas of industry, etc.

Even after the neolib turn, in 1988 Jesse Jackson runs as well as Sanders 2020 and just as 'far left.'

The idea that the 'progressive side' as constituted is much of a change from pretty much any time other than 1994-2008 is wrong.

If it is the case, I would trust people to actually cement progressive power over the next few election cycles.

If you ignore the countervailing forces of money and structural opposition (cf. media coverage from MSNBC of Bernie in January and February), perhaps. At best it's a hope - and probably too late.

It also doesn't change that the current powers that be are wrong and shortsighted - and are desperately trying to keep hold of power to continue being wrong and shortsighted.

At one point I'm wondering if the only thing that could some of you happy is that 90% of the nation votes Sanders and that a progressive executive is given complete carte blanche at all times.

Sure why not, the era of legislation is over

I don’t really expect to be “made happy” by the federal government tho, let alone the democratic (party)

If you ignore the countervailing forces of money and structural opposition (cf. media coverage from MSNBC of Bernie in January and February), perhaps. At best it's a hope - and probably too late.

Ok well what's the point then?

To posting? None, as usual.

Why would a 'progressive' desire anything but progressives dominating the political sphere?

Desiring for everyone to agree with you is sorta nuts but whatever.

If you’re in power they don’t have to agree

The blame for this lies squarely on the gerontocracy.

OK. I blame them, too. Timidity and adherence to the status quo tend to increase in direct proportion to one's length of tenure in Congress. So does one's power to shape policy. Atm the most committed radicals in Congress are the radical right who want to break every part of government except the military and immigration enforcement.

Now we've blamed them.

Why would a 'progressive' desire anything but progressives dominating the political sphere?

No objection here. That's the goal.

what’s the sensible grown up incrementalist progressive approach here https://www.sciencealert.com/hundreds-of-millions-at-risk-of-devastating-climate-apartheid-un-expert-warns

It's gauche to to ask that until after a few election cycles have passed, iirc.

If you’re in power they don’t have to agree

Enacting legislation that improves peoples' lives can often convince them that the policy is sound. This works much better if you message the benefits, both before and after the legislating.

Left, I know I'm in the minority on this board on this issue, but climate catastrophe is going to happen and there's nothing that any of us can do about it. It is going to be long, slow, and painful for many, though, so what can be done is shifting toward sensible and humane approaches to border policies everywhere. That, too, is a long shot, but much more realistic than asking corporations and banks not to kill poor people through actively harming the environment.

I should say, there are other policies that arrive from the first conclusion, too, but border and refugee policy come to my mind first.

Cuing a certain someone to expound on his “shoot them when they try to cross” policy proposals

But only in the legs?

I don’t think our resident ecofascist is that humane

Left, I know I'm in the minority on this board on this issue, but climate catastrophe is going to happen and there's nothing that any of us can do about it. It is going to be long, slow, and painful for many, though, so what can be done is shifting toward sensible and humane approaches to border policies everywhere. That, too, is a long shot, but much more realistic than asking corporations and banks not to kill poor people through actively harming the environment.

Both securing more humane immigration policy for the environmentally affected and working to regulate corporations and banks and govts can be acted upon at the same time. I do not believe choosing one over the other is a necessity.

Regulating corporations and banks? You do realize that this is never going to happen, right?

Your sunshiney approach is a waste of time.

Hey, it still felt almost possible until Warren was nigh-eliminated from Treasury two days ago. Hope is a nice thing to have occasionally.

I have hope for people on the ground helping each other, because that's all I've ever seen work.

yes

Yellen will be good and is approved by Warren.

Regulating corporations and banks? You do realize that this is never going to happen, right?

It happened in the past and it happens elsewhere. No reasons why americans, or anyone, couldn't. The people of France were not magical fairies creatures when they regulated the health care industry into a large public infrastructure.

Yes I have a sunshiney approach to things, I don't see it how it is more or less effective when dealing with political issues or day to day activism.

Not saying that the progressives are in power, just that they've never been so close, and that it is cause for encouragement. The roadmap is there.

― Van Horn Street, Sunday, November 29, 2020 4:07 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

there have definitely been more progressive administrations than a joe biden administration (and the worst part is, they may not have even been particularly progressive for their time)

there have definitely been more progressive administrations than a joe biden administration (and the worst part is, they may not have even been particularly progressive for their time)

You mean the one that hasn't begun yet? Or some other one?