I have a few loyal hecklers from the left that like to lecture me on the evils of the Democrats. If I post something in support of a well known Democrat or Democratic candidate, they can always be counted on to chime in, with comments littered with words like “neoliberal” and “corporate Democrat”.
They never question their own motives but are full of froth and bile about mine. And they really have no idea what my positions are on anything, nor do they care. They just want to vent their spleen and force compliance with their own viewpoint. In their minds, anyone who supports the “lesser of two evils” is a sell out guilty of a thought crime.
So I thought I would share the POLICY positions I actually support.
Here are the things I support strongly:
Overturning Santa Clara v Southern Pacific Railroad and its progeny, including all corporate personhood cases such as “money is speech” and Citizen’s United.
Scrapping capitalism as such for an economic system grounded in the requirements of the natural world and in creating a level playing field for all. This would include the strongest climate protection program we are scientifically able to deliver and a new monetary system that has no one in poverty and no one over 500 million.
The main economy would be a gift economy meant to be extremely efficient on the consumption side and with as little waste as possible.
Production would be curtailed to just what is needed and making things last would be a status marker.
There would be universal suffrage, publicly run elections, no lobbyists, no contributions. And Election Day would be a three day holiday with food and drink at any lines.
Education and medical care would be universally available.
A woman’s right to reproductive choice would be absolute.
It may be impossible to rule people’s hearts, but institutionalized racism, sexism, and homophobia would be outlawed, and the laws would have teeth.
All the known human rights would apply to all humans.
Every one of these are solidly progressive. As am I.
But, if I am guilty of “wrongthink”, my hecklers are guilty of severe naïveté. Politics is a place for mature adults with a large streak of pragmatism. We are in this mess partly because of the purists.
In a free society the policy agenda is driven by the will of the people, expressed in free and fair elections. The progressive caucus has been pushing for many decades and made very little headway politically.
Is this because the majority of the population doesn’t support these policies? Or because the people who call themselves progressive are lousy at crafting a message? Or because the elections in the United States are not free and fair?
Starting with the election problem: the Democrats, no matter what the far left thinks of them, are pro-democracy. They are pro-voting-rights. They are the only path we have to correct the severe voter suppression and gerrymandering that has put this country on the edge of fascism.
And the anti-Democrat left has helped these fascists time and again by not just refusing to turn out and vote for the available pro-democracy candidate, but also getting into every space they can with the mission of bullying and insulting those who pledge to vote “blue no matter who”.
This is what is known as a positive feedback loop. Without free elections the progressive agenda is a pipe dream. And the only actual party that is fighting for free elections is the Democratic Party. The hardcore purists are defeating their best chance of success out of hubris and spite.
But, if their were a powerful voter’s rights act in place, would progressives start to win? The answer is maybe.
60% of the population probably supports most of the policy agenda I put fourth above. But the ones who claim to be the champions of these policies have not done well in garnering political support. Why?
It is the messaging and the attitude. Taking an extremely rigid position, then deciding you know better than the rest of the world and attempting to shove it down the throat of the electorate without letting them choose it freely is not the path to success.
And then, holding the rest of the world in contempt when they reject the ideas you care about is not the way to win hearts and minds.
Should progressives have more political power? Should there be more than two parties and a more fair way to choose our leaders? Yes.
But the progressives have not earned the support they desire. And the two party system is a fact of life. As is corporate oligarchical rule.
And that may be the root of the problem. It is easier to attack Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi than to take on a transnational cabal with almost unlimited power. It is easier to demonize Democrats than to take down the untenable system that has embraced unrestrained capitalism to the great harm of people and planet.
If progressives want political power they must put aside the arrogance and laziness and go after the real monsters. And electing Democrats is the only path forward for that goal, at least in the United States.
I'm confused - who are the "progressives" and what makes them so? Also, I don't see that they are taking anything AWAY from the Democrats. ALSO, give me an example of a Democrat Left - I don't know what that means either. FRANKLY, I believe the Dems performed QUITE WELL in these midterm elections. They stopped what was "supposed" to be a Red Wave. We NOW have a Senate Majority - Mr Schumer is leading now, NOT Mitch the Bitch. As for Manchin and Sinema - what can we do about THEM? I wish they'd just call themselves what they are - Republicans who really make Dems fearful AND pissed off. Countrywide - the Democrats performed QUITE WELL! How about some of "that talk"? We got out and VOTED!