• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Democrats : 3 Rungs Lower Than Whale Shit

MHBDemon said:
Wasn't the 2016 cycle the ultimate failure of a politics centered around "trying to bring white moderates into the fold?"
Click to expand...

No. It’s the opposite. It was the ultimate failure of white moderates trying to bring progressives and non-political people into the fold.

You seem to have not noticed everything happening on the left over the last 2 years. You’re like a guy who found this great restaurant and you’re so mad new people are coming to the restaurant that you mock them because they used to go to Olive Garden.
 
PhDeac said:
No. It’s the opposite. It was the ultimate failure of white moderates trying to bring progressives and non-political people into the fold.
Click to expand...

My interpretation of MHBDemon's post is that when given the opportunity to vote for Clinton or Trump, white moderates voted for Trump. I'm assuming that you are both talking about right-leaning moderates, though.
 
PhDeac said:
I think I finally understand why we keep having this argument.

I think the reason many white moderates are white moderates is because there hasn’t really been a true progressive message coming from Democrats. Once that message is out there, it will attract a broader audience.

Despite constantly talking about DSA growing from 7,000 to 50,000 members and despite a notable increase in Democrats running as progressives, you don’t think progressive politics can draw a broader audience.

I have confidence in your message and you don’t.
Click to expand...

Isn't an additional problem that many members of DSA are unwilling to dilute or "incrementalize" its message? This seems central to a big tent approach to politics. At this moment, DSA's foray into mainstream party politics seems more likely to agitate the majority into expanding its platforms than attempting to unseat the Democratic party. With an eye towards historical explanation, there is absolutely no rational or logical reason that we do not have single payer in this country. That said, once you factor in how indebted politicians are to the pharmaceutical and insurance industries, the incrementalist approach makes sense. I think that a true progressive is not as interested in what is possible in the "pragmatic sense" (in quotation marks because it's just a gloss for conservative incrementalist excuses) and what is possible from a politics that operates from the premise that citizens living in a national territory deserve basic human rights (not in quotation marks because as we become more technically advanced as a society, what constitutes basic human rights should absolutely expand).

tl;dr - I'm not sure that it has much to do with confidence in messages or ideologies.
 
Your party is fracturing. Like true Dems you have no real self-awareness. You point at R’s and see dysfunction and discord while it is your party that is slipping ever and more dangerously toward the failed ideologies of the past.

As McCluhan noted apropos Marxism and its steady stream of outlandish promises and spectacular failures..”it is a rear-view mirror ideology”

Add this fact to the fact Obama left you without infrastructure and no bench. 8 years later and a bankrupt DNC and an ascendant class of gender bewildered handout seekers
 
RJKarl said:
Using things that happened 30 years ago is totally dishonest.

Why don't you talk about Biden's creating the Violence Against Women Act? Or how he and Diane Feinstein wrote the law that took assault weapons out of stores and gun shows for over a decade?

Hell, when I was at Wake there were under 20 Jews on campus. I would guess 2-4 frats would even invite a Jew to a party. Should we say that's the way it is today?

How about the guy who has a show on CNN about how he used to be a Neo-Nazi but now he helps people escape that and turn their lives around?

I have a friend named Kerry Noble. There was a time that he was one of the most dangerous people in America. He was a godfather of terrorism and racism. He trained some of the worst of the worst in RW militias and hate groups. But then, he had an epiphany. Since the late-90s, he has been helping fight his former allies in spite a bounty on his life.

About ten years before OKC, Kerry, Wayne Snell and two others were on their way to blow up the Murrah Building when their car broke down. In fact, Tim McVeigh corresponded with Snell (who was on death row) before blowing up the same target. The CBC had a 60 Minutes type show that Snell saying, "thanks guys" upon hearing about OKC.

Is Kerry the guy who had multiple 55-gallon drums of cyanide on the CSA's Arkansas farm waiting kill people or the people who has spent over two decades fighting racism and hate? Is he the guy who wanted to blow up the Murrah Building or the guy who worked with Jewish and black groups to tell what to look for in hate groups?

Your repeated use of actions that happened decades ago shows weakness and has no value to where people stand today.
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
I think I finally understand why we keep having this argument.

I think the reason many white moderates are white moderates is because there hasn’t really been a true progressive message coming from Democrats. Once that message is out there, it will attract a broader audience.

Despite constantly talking about DSA growing from 7,000 to 50,000 members and despite a notable increase in Democrats running as progressives, you don’t think progressive politics can draw a broader audience.

I have confidence in your message and you don’t.
Click to expand...

C'mon PH. This makes no sense. You are completely ignoring the historical trend of how trying to appeal to white moderates led to a rightward shift and an absence of a progressive message.

I have brought up our membership numbers at various times to 1)show that we had little to no impact on the 2016 outcome (~5-7k members) and 2)show that the rapid growth of our movement CAN draw a broader audience. Don't be dick with the "constantly" nonsense.

I have such little confidence in my message that I decided to risk future employment opportunities by openly being a socialist, joining in leadership roles, canvassing, phonebanking, helping lead a reading group, etc.

Because I'd prefer to organize poor and working class people, rather than white moderates, does not mean that I lack confidence in my message. It means I lack confidence that the institutions that protect white wealth will ever release their grip on power in order to create the kind of economic and racial justice that I desire in the world.
 
Lectro said:
Your party is fracturing. Like true Dems you have no real self-awareness. You point at R’s and see dysfunction and discord while it is your party that is slipping ever and more dangerously toward the failed ideologies of the past.

As McCluhan noted apropos Marxism and its steady stream of outlandish promises and spectacular failures..”it is a rear-view mirror ideology”

Add this fact to the fact Obama left you without infrastructure and no bench. 8 years later and a bankrupt DNC and an ascendant class of gender bewildered handout seekers
Click to expand...

Not fracturing, re-evaluating and changing commensurate to the new voices and ideas in the party. Vastly different than how the Republican Party disintegrated over the last half-century into a conspiracy-believing, identity politics-wielding, fascist, racist shell of a party.
 
MHBDemon said:
C'mon PH. This makes no sense. You are completely ignoring the historical trend of how trying to appeal to white moderates led to a rightward shift and an absence of a progressive message.

I have brought up our membership numbers at various times to 1)show that we had little to no impact on the 2016 outcome (~5-7k members) and 2)show that the rapid growth of our movement CAN draw a broader audience. Don't be dick with the "constantly" nonsense.

I have such little confidence in my message that I decided to risk future employment opportunities by openly being a socialist, joining in leadership roles, canvassing, phonebanking, helping lead a reading group, etc.

Because I'd prefer to organize poor and working class people, rather than white moderates, does not mean that I lack confidence in my message. It means I lack confidence that the institutions that protect white wealth will ever release their grip on power in order to create the kind of economic and racial justice that I desire in the world.
Click to expand...

Who are you talking about was historically trying to appeal to white moderates? Doesn't it make more sense to say Democrats have been controlled by white moderates?
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Not fracturing, re-evaluating and changing commensurate to the new voices and ideas in the party. Vastly different than how the Republican Party disintegrated over the last half-century into a conspiracy-believing, identity politics-wielding, fascist, racist shell of a party.
Click to expand...

That’s humorous my good man. From where my bias-confirms you have it spot on yet wholly in the opposite..
 
PhDeac said:
Who are you talking about was historically trying to appeal to white moderates? Doesn't it make more sense to say Democrats have been controlled by white moderates?
Click to expand...

You are kind of proving my point that the party has been more concerned with protecting the interests of white capital owners than protecting the marginalized. Controlled by white moderates and appealing to white moderates. Is that really central to the discussion?
 
As mdmh has pointed out, the the stated goals of the party conflict with the interests of capital, so if they are controlled by capital, then kind of hard to be progressive. That is why DSA has dues and does not take corporate money.
 
MHBDemon said:
You are kind of proving my point that the party has been more concerned with protecting the interests of white capital owners than protecting the marginalized. Controlled by white moderates and appealing to white moderates. Is that really central to the discussion?
Click to expand...

You’re kind of proving my point that progressives have never really tried to sell a progressive message to white moderates.
 
Im not really sure of the point of this. What are you arguing?
 
MHBDemon said:
Im not really sure of the point of this. What are you arguing?
Click to expand...

The same thing I’ve been arguing for the last few days. It’s foolish for DSA or progressives to just write off “white moderates” or “suburbanites.”
 
Ok cool. There is a distinction between not “writing them off” and diluting our material analysis in order to win them over. We are making a pitch for Medicare for All and Free College for All and higher wages. To the extent white moderates can get down with that message, cool. I’m not gonna say that we should start accepting endorsements from police unions or compromise on some other bullshit market based healthcare care solution to win over centrists.
 
And I never said you should. So you’ve been arguing with me all this time even though you agree with me.
 
I mean I’m not writing off poor rural people that traditionally vote republican either. Isn’t DSA making a progressive message? I thought you were making an argument to move off our anti-capitalist ideology or otherwise water down our platform in order to “not write them off.”

Like i said, it’s more important for me to try to organize people that traditional parties have ignored.
 
PhDeac said:
And I never said you should. So you’ve been arguing with me all this time even though you agree with me.
Click to expand...

maybe you’ve been arguing with him even though you agree with him
 
MHBDemon said:
I mean I’m not writing off poor rural people that traditionally vote republican either. Isn’t DSA making a progressive message? I thought you were making an argument to move off our anti-capitalist ideology or otherwise water down our platform in order to “not write them off.”

Like i said, it’s more important for me to try to organize people that traditional parties have ignored.
Click to expand...

Nope. That’s not what I was saying at all. I don’t think you actually read what I was saying this whole time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top