New Democrats, Progressives and Liberals: battle for control of the party

- Another thread on DU got me to thinking about the ongoing 'battle' between the DLC of the 'new' Democrats and liberals - progressives. I'd like to take a moment to respond to a couple of wyldwolf's assertions on another thread. This is my take on the matter:

-----

"Considering the political climate from 9/11 - to very recently, there would be NO democratic party to speak of had they rocked the boat."

- The 'political climate' you referenced was created by two main factors coming into play: 1) the storm trooper tactics of the Neocons and the hostile takeover of the America media by the zealots and fanatics that make up the Bush* Republicans. 2) the lack of fight, conviction and political bravery by their Democratic opposition. The New Democratic Leadership and their supplicants have conceded on so many issues and refused to demand investigations into so many Bush* scandals that they've virtually blended WITH the Republican party. Both parties hide behind nationalism and patriotism to cover their trail of blood, complicity and war profiteering.

- You make it sound as if the DLC saved the Democratic party by not 'rocking the boat'. It's my painful duty to remind you that Dems have been the minority since 94 and that the Dem president between the Bushes got himself impeached by a rogue congress and was forced time after time to concede to the Republican agenda.

"The Democratic Party didn't frickin' ABANDON us for a good two years. How do you figure that?"

- Maybe they didn't abandon YOU...but they abandoned many Democrats...especially Blacks, progressives and Liberals. Must you be reminded of how Blacks were treated during the 2000 election when all they wanted was ANY Democratic senator to stand up with them and defend their civil rights? And I hope you haven't forgotten how Gore was shunned by the DLC when he attacked the Bush* administration, called (some) corporations 'greedy' and ran a 'populist' campaign?

"And remember, the "lazy-ass DLC" won the last three presidential elections."

- Certainly you're not still counting the last election as a 'win'? It's not actually 'winning' until and unless you get your hands on the grand prize. Many (grass roots) Democrats are convinced to this day that Gore would be president if he had received the support of his party leadership the way Republicans supported Bush's* fanatical push for the white house. The facts and the truth were on the side of the Democratic party...but they failed to follow through and take the Bushies head on in a fight for the direction and future of democracy.

"Tell me - how many elections have more liberal candidates won?"

- You nicely personify the attitude the DLC shows towards liberals. Has it ever occurred to you that liberal candidates aren't as 'successful' because they're attacked, marginalized and smeared by BOTH the conservative left and right? It's strange how the DLC continues to insist that 'liberals' can't win elections...as they do everything they can to shun them and keep them from being considered as serious candidates. DLCers should already KNOW why liberals and progressives have a difficult time getting their leadership into power. The progressive ideology is the antithesis of the corporate state and the desires of the ruling class. This makes them the political leper to the conservative Left and Right and those greedily feeding at the government and corporate teat.

- What's the 'ruling class'? Bush* and his cronies, flunkies and apologists who belong (or want to) belong to the small group of wealthy people in this country (and abroad) who own nearly everything. It's three or four percent of the population at the very most. They're the ones who, once they get in office, auction off the government piece by piece to their fellow fat cats. Up to now they haven't been in a position to own the national treasury, resources and the American workforce...but they're close to achieving that goal with the cooperation of the 'new' Democrats.

"The losses of the 90s can also be laid at the feet of lazy liberals who coasted on Clinton's popularity and who didn't fight the GOP smear machine. Those same liberals have started their own smear machine as well. Your post is a prime example."

- Liberals have been out of power in the Democratic party since at least the 80s. Even today...there's no more than a handful of liberals remaining in both houses. How then would you expect them to fight the 'GOP smear machine'? Any power liberals had...any voice they had...was driven from the party by the same DLCers who now insist that only they can win elections.

- Democracy's very existence depends on the sharing of power. That's why we have a two-party system and not a one-party government.

- The New Democrats insist that the only way we can win elections is to unify behind one leadership and whether or not we happen to agree with their politics is supposed to be secondary to winning. Power and winning have become everything as both parties abandon the Little People for hundreds of millions in campaign cash in exchange for laws, bills and legislation favorable to those who possess the most gold.

- We 'liberals' have been informed that winning is everything and that principles, values and the people have to wait until those who have taken control of the party win back a majority. We're still waiting. Meanwhile...don't fret if we protest and complain about those things the party is giving up for the sake of 'winning'.

- Comments?

give a fair assessment of them. It's all vile comments which does not help the cause of the debate.

I happen to think the DLC is helping the party & the people on the far left are lunatics. See what I mean?

That really doesn't help intelligent discourse.

The opposite of the right isn't the center.

It was the "far left" that originated the fights for an end to child labor, for the 40 hour work week, for vacation pay, for civil rights, for safe working conditions, for legal abortion, for women's right to vote, for an end to the war in Vietnam and for an uncovering of the government's misconduct during COINTELPRO days.

Thank God for them.


(edit - spelling)

ON EIT: see post #3 for what I am talking about.

In my view they have no interest in changing the general direction of the country...

What more can I say?

Like I said a fair assessment.

So I generalized? Fair enough.
Kerry hasn't shown interest in changing the direction either though, other than not being Bush of course.

is an attempt by the moderate repugs to steal our party and use it to push the repug agenda. I have many conservative ideas however I'm a democrat not a repug lite and I stand by the principles of the party which I joined in 1968. Freedom for all Americans, dedicated to the bill of rights and the constitution and begging for a fight. The DLC/DNC/RNC cabala are joined at the hip to ensure that the rich and powerful stay that way and that the serfs know their place. I believe it the old adage "lead move or get out of the way" the time for compromise and working with the fascists to "try to limit the damage" is past, and we have to stand for something or kneel to monnied interests. I for one will stand and fight as I do every day. I allow no one to get away with racist fascists remarks without challenging them. I came in this world with no friends and may leave it the same way, but everyone will know where I stand.

1. Calling another DU'er out in a new thread to continue what could be percieved as a flame war is against DU rules. And this isn't the first time you've done this.

2. There is no battle for control of the party. Currently the DLC or moderate dems (what some on DU call DLC-type dems) hold the positions of power. I really don't see anyone beyond some on DU challenging that. I also resent, once again, someone trying to define who is liberal and/or progressive.

3. Who here doesn't believe Al Gore won the 2000 presidential election?

4. By not linking to the thread you reference, you do everyone a disservice who will respond to your new thread. FOX-news type tactics.

5. The mentioned thread blamed Bill Clinton and the "lazy ass DLC" for the loss of house seats in the 90s. The poster in question never answered my question as to whose fault it was when DEMS lost BEFORE the DLC.

6. I was referring to lay-class liberals not fighting the GOP smear machine. People like you think you are.

Any power liberals had...any voice they had...was driven from the party by the same DLCers who now insist that only they can win elections.

Proof?

The New Democrats insist that the only way we can win elections is to unify behind one leadership and whether or not we happen to agree with their politics is supposed to be secondary to winning. Power and winning have become everything as both parties abandon the Little People for hundreds of millions in campaign cash in exchange for laws, bills and legislation favorable to those who possess the most gold.

Laughable.

Run your candidates and win.

The DLC does.

Maybe they didn't abandon YOU...but they abandoned many Democrats...especially Blacks, progressives and Liberals. Must you be reminded of how Blacks were treated during the 2000 election when all they wanted was ANY Democratic senator to stand up with them and defend their civil rights? And I hope you haven't forgotten how Gore was shunned by the DLC when he attacked the Bush* administration, called (some) corporations 'greedy' and ran a 'populist' campaign?

Then why didn't a non-DLC dem stand up for the blacks in Florida?

- And I clearly outline my intent in the first paragraph. There is no 'calling out' here. Just an opportunity to present a rebuttal to your claims about liberals.

- We don't have horns and we're DEMOCRATS. What more could you want?

And don't say it can't be done; look, the Republicans managed to wed neocon philosophy with Christian fundamentalism and wave the banner of old-school conservatism over all of it. They have Roman Catholics and Ayn Randists and semi-secular Jews voting for radical Protestant fundies and vice-versa; and believe me, that took some doing. We can make this happen, we can. We just need to put the "Judean Peoples' Front" versus the "People's Front of Judea!" thing aside for a while...

Calling out.